Toward a Global Regime for Compute Governance: Building the Pause Button

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.20530v1
• Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 15:18:19 GMT
• Title: Toward a Global Regime for Compute Governance: Building the Pause Button
• Authors: Ananthi Al Ramiah, Raymond Koopmanschap, Josh Thorsteinson, Sadruddin Khan, Jim Zhou, Shafira Noh, Joep Meindertsma, Farhan Shafiq,
• Abstract summary: We propose a governance system designed to prevent AI systems from being trained by restricting access to computational resources.<n>We identify three key intervention points -- technical, traceability, and regulatory -- and organize them within a Governance--Enforcement--Verification framework.<n> Technical mechanisms include tamper-proof FLOP caps, model locking, and offline licensing.
• Score: 0.4952055253916912
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: As AI capabilities rapidly advance, the risk of catastrophic harm from large-scale training runs is growing. Yet the compute infrastructure that enables such development remains largely unregulated. This paper proposes a concrete framework for a global "Compute Pause Button": a governance system designed to prevent dangerously powerful AI systems from being trained by restricting access to computational resources. We identify three key intervention points -- technical, traceability, and regulatory -- and organize them within a Governance--Enforcement--Verification (GEV) framework to ensure rules are clear, violations are detectable, and compliance is independently verifiable. Technical mechanisms include tamper-proof FLOP caps, model locking, and offline licensing. Traceability tools track chips, components, and users across the compute supply chain. Regulatory mechanisms establish constraints through export controls, production caps, and licensing schemes. Unlike post-deployment oversight, this approach targets the material foundations of advanced AI development. Drawing from analogues ranging from nuclear non-proliferation to pandemic-era vaccine coordination, we demonstrate how compute can serve as a practical lever for global cooperation. While technical and political challenges remain, we argue that credible mechanisms already exist, and that the time to build this architecture is now, before the window for effective intervention closes.

Related papers

• Quantifying Automation Risk in High-Automation AI Systems: A Bayesian Framework for Failure Propagation and Optimal Oversight [1.6328866317851185]
  We propose a parsimonious Bayesian risk decomposition expressing expected loss as the product of three terms.<n>This framework captures execution and oversight risk rather than model accuracy alone.<n>We motivate the framework with an illustrative case study of the 2012 Knight Capital incident as one instantiation of a broadly applicable failure pattern.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-22T00:18:23Z)
• CaMeLs Can Use Computers Too: System-level Security for Computer Use Agents [60.98294016925157]
  AI agents are vulnerable to prompt injection attacks, where malicious content hijacks agent behavior to steal credentials or cause financial loss.<n>We introduce Single-Shot Planning for CUAs, where a trusted planner generates a complete execution graph with conditional branches before any observation of potentially malicious content.<n>Although this architectural isolation successfully prevents instruction injections, we show that additional measures are needed to prevent Branch Steering attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-14T23:06:35Z)
• The Agentic Regulator: Risks for AI in Finance and a Proposed Agent-based Framework for Governance [6.107950696680386]
  Current model-risk frameworks assume static, well-specified algorithms and one-time validations.<n>We model these technologies as decentralized ensembles whose risks propagate along multiple time-scales.<n>We propose a modular governance architecture that decomposes oversight into four layers of "regulatory blocks"
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-12T05:57:32Z)
• Policy-as-Prompt: Turning AI Governance Rules into Guardrails for AI Agents [0.19336815376402716]
  We introduce a regulatory machine learning framework that converts unstructured design artifacts (like PRDs, TDDs, and code) into verifiable runtime guardrails.<n>Our Policy as Prompt method reads these documents and risk controls to build a source-linked policy tree.<n>System is built to enforce least privilege and data minimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-28T17:36:52Z)
• Governable AI: Provable Safety Under Extreme Threat Models [31.36879992618843]
  We propose a Governable AI (GAI) framework that shifts from traditional internal constraints to externally enforced structural compliance.<n>The GAI framework is composed of a simple yet reliable, fully deterministic, powerful, flexible, and general-purpose rule enforcement module (REM); governance rules; and a governable secure super-platform (GSSP) that offers end-to-end protection against compromise or subversion by AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-28T04:22:59Z)
• Never Compromise to Vulnerabilities: A Comprehensive Survey on AI Governance [211.5823259429128]
  We propose a comprehensive framework integrating technical and societal dimensions, structured around three interconnected pillars: Intrinsic Security, Derivative Security, and Social Ethics.<n>We identify three core challenges: (1) the generalization gap, where defenses fail against evolving threats; (2) inadequate evaluation protocols that overlook real-world risks; and (3) fragmented regulations leading to inconsistent oversight.<n>Our framework offers actionable guidance for researchers, engineers, and policymakers to develop AI systems that are not only robust and secure but also ethically aligned and publicly trustworthy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T09:42:56Z)
• Distributed and Decentralised Training: Technical Governance Challenges in a Shifting AI Landscape [1.6590638305972631]
  Low-communication training algorithms are enabling a shift from centralised model training to compute setups that are either distributed across multiple clusters or decentralised via community-driven contributions.<n>This paper distinguishes these two scenarios - distributed and decentralised training - which are little understood and often conflated in policy discourse.<n>We discuss how they could impact technical AI governance through an increased risk of compute structuring, capability proliferation, and the erosion of detectability and shutdownability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-10T13:43:15Z)
• Explainable AI Systems Must Be Contestable: Here's How to Make It Happen [2.5875936082584623]
  This paper presents the first rigorous formal definition of contestability in explainable AI.<n>We introduce a modular framework of by-design and post-hoc mechanisms spanning human-centered interfaces, technical processes, and organizational architectures.<n>Our work equips practitioners with the tools to embed genuine recourse and accountability into AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-02T13:32:05Z)
• Watermarking Without Standards Is Not AI Governance [46.71493672772134]
  We argue that current implementations risk serving as symbolic compliance rather than delivering effective oversight.<n>We propose a three-layer framework encompassing technical standards, audit infrastructure, and enforcement mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T18:10:04Z)
• Designing Control Barrier Function via Probabilistic Enumeration for Safe Reinforcement Learning Navigation [55.02966123945644]
  We propose a hierarchical control framework leveraging neural network verification techniques to design control barrier functions (CBFs) and policy correction mechanisms.<n>Our approach relies on probabilistic enumeration to identify unsafe regions of operation, which are then used to construct a safe CBF-based control layer.<n>These experiments demonstrate the ability of the proposed solution to correct unsafe actions while preserving efficient navigation behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-30T13:47:25Z)
• In-House Evaluation Is Not Enough: Towards Robust Third-Party Flaw Disclosure for General-Purpose AI [93.33036653316591]
  We call for three interventions to advance system safety.<n>First, we propose using standardized AI flaw reports and rules of engagement for researchers.<n>Second, we propose GPAI system providers adopt broadly-scoped flaw disclosure programs.<n>Third, we advocate for the development of improved infrastructure to coordinate distribution of flaw reports.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-21T05:09:46Z)
• Using AI Alignment Theory to understand the potential pitfalls of regulatory frameworks [55.2480439325792]
  This paper critically examines the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) Uses insights from Alignment Theory (AT) research, which focuses on the potential pitfalls of technical alignment in Artificial Intelligence. As we apply these concepts to the EU AI Act, we uncover potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement in the regulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T17:38:38Z)
• Computing Power and the Governance of Artificial Intelligence [51.967584623262674]
  Governments and companies have started to leverage compute as a means to govern AI. compute-based policies and technologies have the potential to assist in these areas, but there is significant variation in their readiness for implementation. naive or poorly scoped approaches to compute governance carry significant risks in areas like privacy, economic impacts, and centralization of power.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-13T21:10:21Z)
• A Survey and Comparative Analysis of Security Properties of CAN Authentication Protocols [92.81385447582882]
  The Controller Area Network (CAN) bus leaves in-vehicle communications inherently non-secure. This paper reviews and compares the 15 most prominent authentication protocols for the CAN bus. We evaluate protocols based on essential operational criteria that contribute to ease of implementation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-19T14:52:04Z)
• Oversight for Frontier AI through a Know-Your-Customer Scheme for Compute Providers [0.8547032097715571]
  Know-Your-Customer (KYC) is a standard developed by the banking sector to identify and verify client identity. KYC could provide a mechanism for greater public oversight of frontier AI development and close loopholes in existing export controls. Unlike the strategy of limiting access to AI chip purchases, regulating the digital access to compute offers more precise controls.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T16:17:29Z)
• Contingency-constrained economic dispatch with safe reinforcement learning [7.133681867718039]
  Reinforcement-learning based (RL) controllers can address this challenge, but cannot themselves provide safety guarantees. We propose a formally validated RL controller for economic dispatch. We extend conventional constraints by a time-dependent constraint encoding the islanding contingency. Unsafe actions are projected into the safe action space while leveraging constrained zonotope set representations for computational efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-12T16:52:48Z)
• KrakN: Transfer Learning framework for thin crack detection in infrastructure maintenance [0.0]
  Currently applied methods are outdated, labour-intensive and inaccurate. We propose to utilize custom made framework -- KrakN, to overcome these limiting factors. It enables the development of unique infrastructure defects detectors on digital images, achieving the accuracy of above 90%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-26T09:57:36Z)

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.