Most censorship isn't "removal of knowledge" but "installation of behavior that prevents some knowledge from being revealed or applied in certain ways".

This behavior can, in turn, be transferred via distillation. But, evidently, financial domain wasn't entangled enough with the censorship behaviors for them to bleed through, in this case.

Consider that LLMs are trained on the corpus of the internet, and (simplifying) consequently give the average answer of the internet. If the desired answer of the censorer is contradictory to this, then it requires additional training data to get the model to act a certain way.

distillation doesnt add anything; all it's doing is reconfiguring some root weights that get drowned out by noisy training and/or datset issues. It strengthens commonalities.

but there's no new information being created.

You can see exactly what prompts we used and the results here: https://github.com/CTGT-Inc/lineage-eval/tree/main/data

We found V4 Flash was significantly more censored than the baseline.

Could just be resources available? Deepseek is the easiest to get up and running on hardware that's pretty readily available:

   unsloth/DeepSeek-V4-Flash-GGUF 4bit ~140GB
   unsloth/Kimi-K3-GGUF 4bit ~1.5TB
   unsloth/GLM-5.2-GGUF 4bit ~400GB

Abliterated models certainly have their uses but they're not the default choice for most users or enterprises, and thus not the versions of those models most would interact with.

This is fixed.

Scrolling on desktop is also broken.

It's most likely to occur when distilling a Chinese model from a Chinese base. We plan to do compliance geometry analysis in the future to see what is structurally changing in the model when distillation causes it to start refusing or whitewashing.

Agreed, we find this to be an interesting reflection of societal values and norms inasmuch LLMs are.

Yes but in which jurisdiction could you publish it? We roughly know what the hot topics are for the current models, but actually testing and ranking would break said censorship and thus would be hammered into the ground through cointelpro methods by all parties.

It would be nice to have a hypothetical small country where the internal censorship would be non aligned and insignificant enough that it wouldn't take away from the overall findings. But it doesn't exist.

I want some science based authority on the moon where only 3-sigma IQ international academics have ultimate authority. Oh wait Asimov did that right? I guess it didn't go so well either.

More important there are some things censored that are true. And some things censored that are false. How do we even get to a good model of the truthiness/nonsense adjustment indicator?

Agreed. It's fixed

Fixed