Visibility into AI Agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.13138v6
• Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 17:45:05 GMT
• Title: Visibility into AI Agents
• Authors: Alan Chan, Carson Ezell, Max Kaufmann, Kevin Wei, Lewis Hammond, Herbie Bradley, Emma Bluemke, Nitarshan Rajkumar, David Krueger, Noam Kolt, Lennart Heim, Markus Anderljung,
• Abstract summary: Increased delegation of commercial, scientific, governmental, and personal activities to AI agents may exacerbate existing societal risks. We assess three categories of measures to increase visibility into AI agents: agent identifiers, real-time monitoring, and activity logging.
• Score: 9.067567737098594
• License: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
• Abstract: Increased delegation of commercial, scientific, governmental, and personal activities to AI agents -- systems capable of pursuing complex goals with limited supervision -- may exacerbate existing societal risks and introduce new risks. Understanding and mitigating these risks involves critically evaluating existing governance structures, revising and adapting these structures where needed, and ensuring accountability of key stakeholders. Information about where, why, how, and by whom certain AI agents are used, which we refer to as visibility, is critical to these objectives. In this paper, we assess three categories of measures to increase visibility into AI agents: agent identifiers, real-time monitoring, and activity logging. For each, we outline potential implementations that vary in intrusiveness and informativeness. We analyze how the measures apply across a spectrum of centralized through decentralized deployment contexts, accounting for various actors in the supply chain including hardware and software service providers. Finally, we discuss the implications of our measures for privacy and concentration of power. Further work into understanding the measures and mitigating their negative impacts can help to build a foundation for the governance of AI agents.

Related papers

• Criticality and Safety Margins for Reinforcement Learning [53.10194953873209]
  We seek to define a criticality framework with both a quantifiable ground truth and a clear significance to users. We introduce true criticality as the expected drop in reward when an agent deviates from its policy for n consecutive random actions. We also introduce the concept of proxy criticality, a low-overhead metric that has a statistically monotonic relationship to true criticality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-26T21:00:45Z)
• Safeguarding AI Agents: Developing and Analyzing Safety Architectures [0.0]
  This paper addresses the need for safety measures in AI systems that collaborate with human teams. We propose and evaluate three frameworks to enhance safety protocols in AI agent systems. We conclude that these frameworks can significantly strengthen the safety and security of AI agent systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-03T10:14:51Z)
• AI Agents Under Threat: A Survey of Key Security Challenges and Future Pathways [10.16690494897609]
  An Artificial Intelligence (AI) agent is a software entity that autonomously performs tasks or makes decisions based on pre-defined objectives and data inputs. This survey delves into the emerging security threats faced by AI agents, categorizing them into four critical knowledge gaps. By systematically reviewing these threats, this paper highlights both the progress made and the existing limitations in safeguarding AI agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-04T01:22:31Z)
• Mapping LLM Security Landscapes: A Comprehensive Stakeholder Risk Assessment Proposal [0.0]
  We propose a risk assessment process using tools like the risk rating methodology which is used for traditional systems. We conduct scenario analysis to identify potential threat agents and map the dependent system components against vulnerability factors. We also map threats against three key stakeholder groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-20T05:17:22Z)
• Prioritizing Safeguarding Over Autonomy: Risks of LLM Agents for Science [65.77763092833348]
  Intelligent agents powered by large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated substantial promise in autonomously conducting experiments and facilitating scientific discoveries across various disciplines. While their capabilities are promising, these agents also introduce novel vulnerabilities that demand careful consideration for safety. This paper conducts a thorough examination of vulnerabilities in LLM-based agents within scientific domains, shedding light on potential risks associated with their misuse and emphasizing the need for safety measures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-06T18:54:07Z)
• AgentBoard: An Analytical Evaluation Board of Multi-turn LLM Agents [76.95062553043607]
  evaluating large language models (LLMs) is essential for understanding their capabilities and facilitating their integration into practical applications. We introduce AgentBoard, a pioneering comprehensive benchmark and accompanied open-source evaluation framework tailored to analytical evaluation of LLM agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-24T01:51:00Z)
• PsySafe: A Comprehensive Framework for Psychological-based Attack, Defense, and Evaluation of Multi-agent System Safety [70.84902425123406]
  Multi-agent systems, when enhanced with Large Language Models (LLMs), exhibit profound capabilities in collective intelligence. However, the potential misuse of this intelligence for malicious purposes presents significant risks. We propose a framework (PsySafe) grounded in agent psychology, focusing on identifying how dark personality traits in agents can lead to risky behaviors. Our experiments reveal several intriguing phenomena, such as the collective dangerous behaviors among agents, agents' self-reflection when engaging in dangerous behavior, and the correlation between agents' psychological assessments and dangerous behaviors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-22T12:11:55Z)
• IxDRL: A Novel Explainable Deep Reinforcement Learning Toolkit based on Analyses of Interestingness [0.0]
  We propose a new framework based on analyses of interestingness. Our tool provides various measures of RL agent competence stemming from interestingness analysis. We show that our framework can provide agent designers with insights about RL agent competence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-18T02:43:19Z)
• Global and Local Analysis of Interestingness for Competency-Aware Deep Reinforcement Learning [0.0]
  We extend a recently-proposed framework for explainable reinforcement learning (RL) based on analyses of "interestingness" Our tools provide insights about RL agent competence, both their capabilities and limitations, enabling users to make more informed decisions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-11T17:48:42Z)
• Inverse Online Learning: Understanding Non-Stationary and Reactionary Policies [79.60322329952453]
  We show how to develop interpretable representations of how agents make decisions. By understanding the decision-making processes underlying a set of observed trajectories, we cast the policy inference problem as the inverse to this online learning problem. We introduce a practical algorithm for retrospectively estimating such perceived effects, alongside the process through which agents update them. Through application to the analysis of UNOS organ donation acceptance decisions, we demonstrate that our approach can bring valuable insights into the factors that govern decision processes and how they change over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-14T17:40:42Z)
• Toward Trustworthy AI Development: Mechanisms for Supporting Verifiable Claims [59.64274607533249]
  AI developers need to make verifiable claims to which they can be held accountable. This report suggests various steps that different stakeholders can take to improve the verifiability of claims made about AI systems. We analyze ten mechanisms for this purpose--spanning institutions, software, and hardware--and make recommendations aimed at implementing, exploring, or improving those mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-15T17:15:35Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.