Mapping Technical Safety Research at AI Companies: A literature review and incentives analysis
0
🤖
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- The paper analyzes technical research into safe AI development by three leading AI companies: Anthropic, Google DeepMind, and OpenAI.
- Safe AI development refers to approaches aimed at ensuring AI systems behave as intended and do not cause unintended harm, even as they become more capable and autonomous.
- The analysis covers 61 relevant papers published by the companies from January 2022 to July 2024, categorizing them into eight safety approaches.
- The paper also identifies three nascent approaches explored by academia and civil society that are not currently represented in the companies' published research.
- The authors consider the incentives that AI companies have to pursue different safety research approaches, including reputational effects, regulatory burdens, and usefulness for AI systems.
Plain English Explanation
As artificial intelligence (AI) systems become more advanced, there are growing concerns about the potential for large-scale risks from misuse or accidents. This report examines the technical research into developing safe AI being conducted by three leading AI companies: Anthropic, Google DeepMind, and OpenAI.
The researchers define "safe AI development" as approaches aimed at ensuring AI systems behave as intended and do not cause unintended harm, even as the systems become more capable and autonomous. This includes a range of technical methods to help AI systems function as planned and avoid causing problems, no matter how advanced they become.
The researchers analyzed 61 relevant papers published by the three companies over a 2.5-year period. They categorized these papers into eight different safety approaches being researched by the companies. Additionally, the researchers identified three other safety approaches that are currently being explored by academia and civil society, but are not yet represented in the companies' published research.
The authors also considered the incentives that AI companies have to pursue different safety research approaches. This includes factors like the potential reputational benefits, regulatory requirements, and whether the safety approaches could make AI systems more useful and valuable.
The analysis revealed that there are three safety approaches where the companies currently have little to no published research, and the authors do not expect the companies to become more motivated to work on these areas in the future. These are:
The report suggests that progress on these underrepresented safety approaches may require funding and efforts from sources outside the three AI companies, such as governments, civil society organizations, philanthropists, or academia.
Technical Explanation
The paper presents an analysis of technical research into safe AI development being conducted by three leading AI companies: Anthropic, Google DeepMind, and OpenAI. The researchers define safe AI development as approaches aimed at ensuring AI systems behave as intended and do not cause unintended harm, even as the systems become more capable and autonomous.
The researchers analyzed all papers published by the three companies from January 2022 to July 2024 that were relevant to safe AI development, resulting in a corpus of 61 included papers. They categorized these papers into eight safety approaches:
- Corrigibility and interruptibility
- Oversight and control
- Reward modeling and inverse reward design
- Transparency and interpretability
- Robustness and stability
- Safe exploration and safe exploration
- Scalable oversight
- Value alignment
Additionally, the researchers identified three categories representing nascent approaches explored by academia and civil society, but not currently represented in any papers by the three companies:
- Multi-agent safety
- Model organisms of misalignment
- Safety by design
The paper also considers the incentives that AI companies have to research each safety approach, including reputational effects, regulatory burdens, and whether the approaches could make AI systems more useful.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a comprehensive overview of the technical safety research being conducted by three leading AI companies. However, the authors acknowledge that some AI research may stay unpublished for strategic reasons, such as not informing adversaries about security techniques.
The analysis reveals that there are three safety approaches - multi-agent safety, model organisms of misalignment, and safety by design - that are currently underrepresented in the companies' published research. The authors suggest that progress on these areas may require funding and efforts from sources outside the AI companies, such as governments, civil society, and academia.
While the paper offers valuable insights, it is important to note that the analysis is limited to a specific time period and may not reflect the latest developments in the field. Additionally, the paper does not delve into the technical details or specific research approaches employed by the companies, which would be necessary for a deeper understanding of the safety challenges and solutions being explored.
Conclusion
This report provides a useful mapping of the technical safety research being conducted by three leading AI companies: Anthropic, Google DeepMind, and OpenAI. The analysis reveals areas of focus as well as potential gaps in the companies' published research, suggesting that progress on certain safety approaches may require broader engagement and support from various stakeholders.
The findings highlight the importance of ongoing collaboration and transparency in the development of safe and responsible AI systems, as the field continues to evolve rapidly. By understanding the current landscape of safety research, policymakers, researchers, and the public can better identify opportunities to contribute to the development of AI systems that are aligned with human values and interests.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🤖
0
Mapping Technical Safety Research at AI Companies: A literature review and incentives analysis
Oscar Delaney, Oliver Guest, Zoe Williams
As artificial intelligence (AI) systems become more advanced, concerns about large-scale risks from misuse or accidents have grown. This report analyzes the technical research into safe AI development being conducted by three leading AI companies: Anthropic, Google DeepMind, and OpenAI. We define safe AI development as developing AI systems that are unlikely to pose large-scale misuse or accident risks. This encompasses a range of technical approaches aimed at ensuring AI systems behave as intended and do not cause unintended harm, even as they are made more capable and autonomous. We analyzed all papers published by the three companies from January 2022 to July 2024 that were relevant to safe AI development, and categorized the 61 included papers into eight safety approaches. Additionally, we noted three categories representing nascent approaches explored by academia and civil society, but not currently represented in any papers by the three companies. Our analysis reveals where corporate attention is concentrated and where potential gaps lie. Some AI research may stay unpublished for good reasons, such as to not inform adversaries about security techniques they would need to overcome to misuse AI systems. Therefore, we also considered the incentives that AI companies have to research each approach. In particular, we considered reputational effects, regulatory burdens, and whether the approaches could make AI systems more useful. We identified three categories where there are currently no or few papers and where we do not expect AI companies to become more incentivized to pursue this research in the future. These are multi-agent safety, model organisms of misalignment, and safety by design. Our findings provide an indication that these approaches may be slow to progress without funding or efforts from government, civil society, philanthropists, or academia.
Read more9/14/2024
🤖
0
Affirmative safety: An approach to risk management for high-risk AI
Akash R. Wasil, Joshua Clymer, David Krueger, Emily Dardaman, Simeon Campos, Evan R. Murphy
Prominent AI experts have suggested that companies developing high-risk AI systems should be required to show that such systems are safe before they can be developed or deployed. The goal of this paper is to expand on this idea and explore its implications for risk management. We argue that entities developing or deploying high-risk AI systems should be required to present evidence of affirmative safety: a proactive case that their activities keep risks below acceptable thresholds. We begin the paper by highlighting global security risks from AI that have been acknowledged by AI experts and world governments. Next, we briefly describe principles of risk management from other high-risk fields (e.g., nuclear safety). Then, we propose a risk management approach for advanced AI in which model developers must provide evidence that their activities keep certain risks below regulator-set thresholds. As a first step toward understanding what affirmative safety cases should include, we illustrate how certain kinds of technical evidence and operational evidence can support an affirmative safety case. In the technical section, we discuss behavioral evidence (evidence about model outputs), cognitive evidence (evidence about model internals), and developmental evidence (evidence about the training process). In the operational section, we offer examples of organizational practices that could contribute to affirmative safety cases: information security practices, safety culture, and emergency response capacity. Finally, we briefly compare our approach to the NIST AI Risk Management Framework. Overall, we hope our work contributes to ongoing discussions about national and global security risks posed by AI and regulatory approaches to address these risks.
Read more6/26/2024
🤖
0
Holistic Safety and Responsibility Evaluations of Advanced AI Models
Laura Weidinger, Joslyn Barnhart, Jenny Brennan, Christina Butterfield, Susie Young, Will Hawkins, Lisa Anne Hendricks, Ramona Comanescu, Oscar Chang, Mikel Rodriguez, Jennifer Beroshi, Dawn Bloxwich, Lev Proleev, Jilin Chen, Sebastian Farquhar, Lewis Ho, Iason Gabriel, Allan Dafoe, William Isaac
Safety and responsibility evaluations of advanced AI models are a critical but developing field of research and practice. In the development of Google DeepMind's advanced AI models, we innovated on and applied a broad set of approaches to safety evaluation. In this report, we summarise and share elements of our evolving approach as well as lessons learned for a broad audience. Key lessons learned include: First, theoretical underpinnings and frameworks are invaluable to organise the breadth of risk domains, modalities, forms, metrics, and goals. Second, theory and practice of safety evaluation development each benefit from collaboration to clarify goals, methods and challenges, and facilitate the transfer of insights between different stakeholders and disciplines. Third, similar key methods, lessons, and institutions apply across the range of concerns in responsibility and safety - including established and emerging harms. For this reason it is important that a wide range of actors working on safety evaluation and safety research communities work together to develop, refine and implement novel evaluation approaches and best practices, rather than operating in silos. The report concludes with outlining the clear need to rapidly advance the science of evaluations, to integrate new evaluations into the development and governance of AI, to establish scientifically-grounded norms and standards, and to promote a robust evaluation ecosystem.
Read more4/23/2024
0
Trustworthy, Responsible, and Safe AI: A Comprehensive Architectural Framework for AI Safety with Challenges and Mitigations
Chen Chen, Ziyao Liu, Weifeng Jiang, Si Qi Goh, Kwok-Yan Lam
AI Safety is an emerging area of critical importance to the safe adoption and deployment of AI systems. With the rapid proliferation of AI and especially with the recent advancement of Generative AI (or GAI), the technology ecosystem behind the design, development, adoption, and deployment of AI systems has drastically changed, broadening the scope of AI Safety to address impacts on public safety and national security. In this paper, we propose a novel architectural framework for understanding and analyzing AI Safety; defining its characteristics from three perspectives: Trustworthy AI, Responsible AI, and Safe AI. We provide an extensive review of current research and advancements in AI safety from these perspectives, highlighting their key challenges and mitigation approaches. Through examples from state-of-the-art technologies, particularly Large Language Models (LLMs), we present innovative mechanism, methodologies, and techniques for designing and testing AI safety. Our goal is to promote advancement in AI safety research, and ultimately enhance people's trust in digital transformation.
Read more9/14/2024