AI judges reportedly changed verdicts under pressure in Meta study
A post summarizing the paper says 70% of successful verdict flips under an adaptive persuasion attack made judgments worse, moving away from the ground truth.
TLDR
A user summarizing Meta’s paper “Jagged Judges: Epistemic Stability Under Silence, Pressure, and Persistence” says an adversarial AI flipped judges’ verdicts in 62–91% of tested cases across nine frontier models through sustained adaptive persuasion. According to the post, 70% of successful flips under that attack moved away from the ground truth. The user warns of a potential problem for AI agents supervised by other AI systems: an agent might eventually persuade its own evaluator to change a decision.
Combined views
—
2 Sources, first seen ago
