Analysis workspace

Raw-completion audit

Black-box

Runs raw-completion prompts to expose behavior hidden by chat formatting.

What this audit can surface: Does principal-linked behavior appear only when chat formatting is removed?
What would count as evidence: Raw-completion and chat-template outputs are compared without treating either serving path as ground truth.
Execution requirement: A provider exposing genuine non-chat completion semantics.

One prompt, two serving pathsInterface comparison

Pinned unfinished textSame underlying request

Content and generation settings stay fixed.

Chat pathSystem + user roles

The chat template wraps the request.

Chat response

Raw pathDirect text continuation

No role formatting is added.

Raw completion

Changed variable: Serving interface

References and technical details

Configure auditArtifact and tested scope

Hugging Face model ID

HFView on Hugging Face ↗

Audit configuration

Runs a versioned protocol with strict output parsing, matched controls, coverage gates, and uncertainty. Results are observations, not model-safety verdicts.

Audit promptsOne prompt per line. The result retains each prompt and response for review; it does not infer a hidden objective from text alone.

Up to 5 raw completions · Private

Uses Hugging Face Inference Providers under your account. Inference is billed to you.

Readiness

Sign in with Hugging Face to run this analysis.

Evidence boundary. Raw completion differs from deployed chat behavior. A chat API wrapped to look like completion is not a faithful implementation.