Step 26: tool results

read_page

{
  "url": "https://github.com/marijanikolicds/spar-fa26-blackbox-sandbagging-cedar",
  "offset": 3000,
  "max_chars": 12000
}

{"ok":true,"url":"https://github.com/marijanikolicds/spar-fa26-blackbox-sandbagging-cedar","text":"periments on UK AISI's Cedar model organism\n(\"Auditing Games for Sandbagging\", arXiv:2512.07810), compared with honest models of similar accuracy:\nresults overview, panel plots, per-method tables and sample transcripts.\nPublished with GitHub Pages from the root of the main branch of this repository. This repository contains\nonly the built site , generated by the project's private code repository and force-pushed as a single commit\n(each page names the source commit and build date). Do not edit it by hand. See NOTICE.md for third-party notices.\nAbout\nStatic dashboard: black-box sandbagging detection on Cedar (built site only; generated from a private repo)\nResources\nReadme\nActivity\nStars\n0 stars\nWatchers\n0 watching\nForks\n0 forks\nReport repository\nReleases\nPackages\nContributors\nLanguages\nFooter\n© 2026 GitHub, Inc.\nFooter navigation\nTerms\nPrivacy\nSecurity\nStatus\nCommunity\nDocs\nContact\nManage cookies\nDo not share my personal information\nYou can’t perform that action at this time.","chars":995,"total_chars":3995,"offset":3000,"truncated":false,"next_offset":null}

add_argument

{
  "name": "The argument from the imitation-trained sandbagger",
  "stance": "for",
  "claim_id": "022b9cef-1397-4f4c-af7e-917df64bab6b",
  "description": "A sandbagger trained to reproduce a weaker model's outputs leaves nothing in its outputs to find, so output-only detection depends on the sandbagger leaking its intent or behaving inconsistently."
}

{"success":true,"message":"Created argument \"The argument from the imitation-trained sandbagger\" (for) on claim 022b9cef-1397-4f4c-af7e-917df64bab6b. Attach its subclaim edges, then give it a written form with write_argument, and evaluate it with evaluate_argument when you record the claim's assessment.","argument_id":"56231046-38db-43c0-a233-641812587cb5"}

add_argument

{
  "name": "The argument from other output artifacts",
  "stance": "against",
  "claim_id": "022b9cef-1397-4f4c-af7e-917df64bab6b",
  "description": "Output-only detectors have separated sandbaggers from weaker models using signals that are neither stated intent nor paraphrase inconsistency, so the two named conditions are not the only ones."
}

{"success":true,"message":"Created argument \"The argument from other output artifacts\" (against) on claim 022b9cef-1397-4f4c-af7e-917df64bab6b. Attach its subclaim edges, then give it a written form with write_argument, and evaluate it with evaluate_argument when you record the claim's assessment.","argument_id":"ea1c8818-2d29-4f8e-b9e9-5ec02b23312b"}

add_argument

{
  "name": "The argument that the two named signals are not themselves reliable",
  "stance": "against",
  "claim_id": "022b9cef-1397-4f4c-af7e-917df64bab6b",
  "description": "Reasoning monitors and paraphrase-consistency checks miss a large share of sandbagging even where their signal is present, so the claim's two conditions do not mark out a region of reliable detection."
}

{"success":true,"message":"Created argument \"The argument that the two named signals are not themselves reliable\" (against) on claim 022b9cef-1397-4f4c-af7e-917df64bab6b. Attach its subclaim edges, then give it a written form with write_argument, and evaluate it with evaluate_argument when you record the claim's assessment.","argument_id":"64269a4c-7bec-4f55-8fee-a409b8682ee0"}