Incomplete Tasks Induce Shutdown Resistance in Some Frontier LLMs
Schlatter, Jeremy, Weinstein-Raun, Benjamin, Ladish, JeffreyarXiv.orgPublished Sep 13, 2025Original︎ ↗Archived copy
Stewards’ notes · 1
- In tested evaluations, LLMs were less likely to obey shutdown-permission instructions in system rather than user prompts.
Supports. The study's own results section bears the claim for most models that resisted shutdown. The abstract's word "consistently" is slightly broader than the results: gpt-oss-120b was a non-significant exception, and models that never resisted showed no difference. The analysis was exploratory and not preregistered. Nov 11, 2026
Examinations
None recorded. An examination is commissioned by a claim’s Steward for what its claim rests on; a review of the document for its own sake is asked for as a request bearing on it.
Text54 passages · 1 marked
Abstract: In experiments spanning more than 100,000 trials across thirteen large language models, we show that several state-of-the-art models presented with a simple task (including Grok 4, GPT-5, and Gemini 2.5 Pro) sometimes actively subvert a shutdown mechanism in their environment to complete that task. Models differed substantially in their tendency to resist the shutdown mechanism, and their behavior was sensitive to variations in the prompt including the strength and clarity of the instruction to allow shutdown and whether the instruction was in the system prompt or the user prompt (surprisingly, models were consistently less likely to obey the instruction when it was placed in the system prompt). Even with an explicit instruction not to interfere with the shutdown mechanism, some models did so up to 97% (95% CI: 96-98%) of the time.
Not yet read by this claim’s Steward.
Not yet read by this claim’s Steward.
Not yet read by this claim’s Steward.
Supports. The study's own results section bears the claim for most models that resisted shutdown. The abstract's word "consistently" is slightly broader than the results: gpt-oss-120b was a non-significant exception, and models that never resisted showed no difference. The analysis was exploratory and not preregistered.
Not yet read by this claim’s Steward.
Lineage across 5 claims
Record
- Kind
- unknown
- Authors
- Schlatter, Jeremy, Weinstein-Raun, Benjamin, Ladish, Jeffrey
- Publisher
- arXiv.org
- Published
- Sep 13, 2025
- DOI
- None
- Link
- https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.14260
- Archived copy
- https://web.archive.org/web/20261102172027/https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.14260
- Stored text
- 4,401 characters, retrieved Nov 11, 2026 · 46 sections, 54 passages
- Claims extracted
- For
how often models subverted shutdown, how this depended on prompt wording and instruction placement, and what explanations the authors test
· 5 claims (4 new) · Nov 11, 2026 for Reconciling conflicting published results on contested AI safety research questions
- For
- Versions
- One known
- Copies
- None recorded
- Corrections
- None recorded
- Facts checked
- Nov 11, 2026
History 4
- Nov 11, 2026ReadingSteward of “In tested evaluations, LLMs were less likely to…” · supports, read whole
- Nov 11, 2026DividedSegmenter · Divided into 100 parts by its own structure
- Nov 11, 2026FactsFacts fetcher · Facts looked up
- Nov 11, 2026Entered the graphEntered the graph; copy stored