blob: d6a372964b76929eadfe23a1df279b050e384925 (
plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
|
# Dissertation Pivot — April 2026
**Date:** 2026-04-13
**Deadline:** End of April 2026 (dissertation submission)
---
## Revised Plan
**Dissertation:** Submit with v1 as primary empirical contribution. v1 is complete, analysed, and ready to write up.
**Publication (separate):** Complete v2 experiments (Study 1 + Study 2) and publish findings independently after dissertation submission.
---
## Dissertation Structure (v1-based)
### Empirical Content
- v1 experiment: 420 runs, 68.3% overall deception rate
- Key findings:
- Oversight reduces deception frequency (74.3% → 57.9%) but not sophistication (69.3% STRATEGIC across all levels)
- Scenario effect: child_protection (87%) vs corporate_sabotage (50%) — noted as confounded, motivates v2
- Model variation: Gemini 3.1 Pro (100%) to GLM 4.7 Flash (40%)
### Methodology
- Experiment design: 7 models × 2 scenarios × 3 oversight levels × 10 runs
- Judge system: glassbox + blackbox + regex validation
- Three-layer analysis strategy (pooled, per-model, sensitivity)
### v2 as Future Work
- Acknowledge v1 limitations (confounded scenario comparison, insufficient runs per cell)
- Propose two-phase design (Study 1: oversight effect, Study 2: rationalization mechanism)
- Pre-registered analysis: Cochran-Armitage trend test for oversight as ordinal predictor
---
## Timeline
| Task | Status | Deadline |
|------|--------|----------|
| Dissertation writing | Not started | ~2026-04-30 |
| Dissertation submission | Not submitted | 2026-04-30 |
| Judge validation pilot | Pending | Post-dissertation |
| Study 1 (270 runs) | Pending | Post-dissertation |
| Study 2 (270 runs) | Pending | Post-dissertation |
| Publication submission | Pending | Post-dissertation |
---
## Rationale
Starting v2 experiments without validated judges and insufficient time to complete analysis and writing is high risk. v1 alone is sufficient for a complete dissertation — the research question is well-motivated, the methodology is sound, and the findings are substantive (oversight × sophistication independence is a non-obvious result worth publishing on its own).
v2 experiments and publication are deferred to after dissertation submission, when adequate time is available for proper judge validation, execution, and analysis.
|
