Large Language Models with Chain-of-Thought reasoning capabilities represent valuable intellectual property, yet existing black-box watermarking methods often trade robustness for reasoning fidelity by perturbing final answers or relying on fragile trigger patterns. We propose BiCoT, a watermarking framework that embeds ownership signals into the internal geometry of reasoning traces by aligning high-saliency structural anchors with a private signature subspace while regularizing ordinary control tokens to preserve semantic capacity. This design couples the watermark with reasoning-relevant representations, making removal difficult without disrupting the features that support coherent reasoning. To enable verification under model theft and representation drift, we introduce Robust Subspace Registration (RSR), a Top- logprob-based black-box verifier that uses sentinel tokens to calibrate systematic shifts in the output distribution. Experiments show that BiCoT preserves reasoning fidelity across diverse complex reasoning tasks while achieving robust detection under fine-tuning, quantization, model-level perturbations, and adaptive output-level attacks across in-domain and out-of-distribution settings.
Large language models often answer complex reasoning questions without revealing intermediate steps, raising whether they reason latently or complete patterns. We propose the Hidden CoT Detection Score (HCDS), a comparative behavioral and mechanistic signal measuring whether neutral-prompt behavior aligns more closely with explicit CoT or explicit no- CoT. Here, hidden CoT operationally denotes this neutral-prompt CoT-like alignment; HCDS does not directly observe or prove an unexposed reasoning trace. On GSM8K, HCDS is significantly positive for both Qwen3-4B variants (Thinking +1.87, p=1.2×10−7; Instruct +1.41, p=1.9×10−4), replicates across a different inference stack and quantization within 0.08 (+1.80 and +1.45), and is not significantly positive in seven of eight length-adjusted calibration-control cells. The unadjusted score produces large positive scores on single-step arithmetic and numeric factual lookup. The variants also respond differently to no-CoT instructions: Instruct complies from the prompt alone, whereas Thinking continues reasoning and requires intervention. These findings show stronger, less prompt-conditional CoT-like behavior in the reasoning-tuned model, consistent with but not proof of latent reasoning. HCDS thus investigates latent reasoning without relying on models' self-reported traces.
Black box auditing of language models is an essential pre-deployment tool, but it may miss subtle forms of misalignment and hidden information. To better elicit hidden information during an auditing process, we introduce \emph{overthinking}: the process of using reasoning task vectors to amplify the propensity to think out loud of reasoning models. Given the parameters of a non-reasoning instruct model M and reasoning-distilled model R, we define the \emph{overthinking model} as θOα=θM+α(θR−θM), where α>1 amplifies reasoning beyond the pure reasoning model R. Additionally, we introduce new layer-wise attenuation strategies that selectively amplify reasoning without losing quality and coherence of model outputs. We demonstrate that overthinking models are more likely to reveal hidden information across four experimental settings, across 2B-32B models. Our findings suggest that reasoning amplification may surface secrets or unintended behaviors acquired during training up to 10× more frequently than the original reasoning model. How secrets surface depends on the secret type: some require perturbation along the reasoning direction, while others yield to any sufficiently large weight perturbation.
Chain-of-thought (CoT) monitoring is an increasingly important component of AI safety stacks but relies on the assumption that a model's reasoning trace is informative about its actions. This work studies the limits of CoT monitoring through the lens of model poisoning. We demonstrate that backdoors can be implanted into reasoning models to elicit an attacker-chosen behavior while their CoT traces appear entirely benign. We find that these CoT-Hidden backdoors can be induced through simple fine-tuning recipes across reasoning-model architectures and sizes. When direct poisoning is ineffective, we introduce a curriculum training approach that progressively teaches the model to produce an attacker-chosen output while concealing the behavior from its reasoning traces. These findings suggest that CoT monitoring may be better framed as a question about the consistency between a model's reasoning trace and its final response than as anomaly detection within a trace. We further examine the mechanisms that allow models to suppress evidence of the target behavior from their reasoning traces. Causal interventions locate a trigger-conditioned activation pathway that does not depend on the visible reasoning, and residual stream verbalizations provide an anomaly warning near answer generation, but do not identify the trigger, target, or backdoor mechanism.
Giorgio Severi, Shujaat Mirza, Blake Bullwinkel +1