Err

Err

Related papers

• AI threats to national security can be countered through an incident regime [55.2480439325792]
  We propose a legally mandated post-deployment AI incident regime that aims to counter potential national security threats from AI systems. Our proposed AI incident regime is split into three phases. The first phase revolves around a novel operationalization of what counts as an 'AI incident' The second and third phases spell out that AI providers should notify a government agency about incidents, and that the government agency should be involved in amending AI providers' security and safety procedures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-25T17:51:50Z)
• AI Safety for Everyone [3.440579243843689]
  Recent discussions and research in AI safety have increasingly emphasized the deep connection between AI safety and existential risk from advanced AI systems. This framing may exclude researchers and practitioners who are committed to AI safety but approach the field from different angles. We find a vast array of concrete safety work that addresses immediate and practical concerns with current AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-13T13:04:59Z)
• Safety Cases: A Scalable Approach to Frontier AI Safety [2.5005109646414017]
  We argue that writing and reviewing safety cases would substantially assist in the fulfilment of the Frontier AI Safety Commitments. We outline open research questions on the methodology, implementation, and technical details of safety cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-05T22:59:53Z)
• AI Safety is Stuck in Technical Terms -- A System Safety Response to the International AI Safety Report [0.0]
  Safety has become the central value around which dominant AI governance efforts are being shaped. The report focuses on the safety risks of general-purpose AI and available technical mitigation approaches. The system safety discipline has dealt with the safety risks of software-based systems for many decades.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-05T22:37:53Z)
• Dynamic safety cases for frontier AI [0.7538606213726908]
  This paper proposes a Dynamic Safety Case Management System (DSCMS) to support both the initial creation of a safety case and its systematic, semi-automated revision over time. We demonstrate this approach on a safety case template for offensive cyber capabilities and suggest ways it can be integrated into governance structures for safety-critical decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-23T14:43:41Z)
• Position: A taxonomy for reporting and describing AI security incidents [57.98317583163334]
  We argue that specific are required to describe and report security incidents of AI systems. Existing frameworks for either non-AI security or generic AI safety incident reporting are insufficient to capture the specific properties of AI security.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-19T13:50:26Z)
• EARBench: Towards Evaluating Physical Risk Awareness for Task Planning of Foundation Model-based Embodied AI Agents [53.717918131568936]
  Embodied artificial intelligence (EAI) integrates advanced AI models into physical entities for real-world interaction. Foundation models as the "brain" of EAI agents for high-level task planning have shown promising results. However, the deployment of these agents in physical environments presents significant safety challenges. This study introduces EARBench, a novel framework for automated physical risk assessment in EAI scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T13:19:37Z)
• AI Risk Categorization Decoded (AIR 2024): From Government Regulations to Corporate Policies [88.32153122712478]
  We identify 314 unique risk categories organized into a four-tiered taxonomy. At the highest level, this taxonomy encompasses System & Operational Risks, Content Safety Risks, Societal Risks, and Legal & Rights Risks. We aim to advance AI safety through information sharing across sectors and the promotion of best practices in risk mitigation for generative AI models and systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T18:13:05Z)
• AI Risk Management Should Incorporate Both Safety and Security [185.68738503122114]
  We argue that stakeholders in AI risk management should be aware of the nuances, synergies, and interplay between safety and security. We introduce a unified reference framework to clarify the differences and interplay between AI safety and AI security.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T21:00:47Z)
• Towards Guaranteed Safe AI: A Framework for Ensuring Robust and Reliable AI Systems [88.80306881112313]
  We will introduce and define a family of approaches to AI safety, which we will refer to as guaranteed safe (GS) AI. The core feature of these approaches is that they aim to produce AI systems which are equipped with high-assurance quantitative safety guarantees. We outline a number of approaches for creating each of these three core components, describe the main technical challenges, and suggest a number of potential solutions to them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T17:38:32Z)
• Affirmative safety: An approach to risk management for high-risk AI [6.133009503054252]
  We argue that entities developing or deploying high-risk AI systems should be required to present evidence of affirmative safety. 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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-14T20:48:55Z)

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.