The Singapore Consensus on Global AI Safety Research Priorities

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.20702v2
• Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 21:04:58 GMT
• Title: The Singapore Consensus on Global AI Safety Research Priorities
• Authors: Yoshua Bengio, Tegan Maharaj, Luke Ong, Stuart Russell, Dawn Song, Max Tegmark, Lan Xue, Ya-Qin Zhang, Stephen Casper, Wan Sie Lee, Sören Mindermann, Vanessa Wilfred, Vidhisha Balachandran, Fazl Barez, Michael Belinsky, Imane Bello, Malo Bourgon, Mark Brakel, Siméon Campos, Duncan Cass-Beggs, Jiahao Chen, Rumman Chowdhury, Kuan Chua Seah, Jeff Clune, Juntao Dai, Agnes Delaborde, Nouha Dziri, Francisco Eiras, Joshua Engels, Jinyu Fan, Adam Gleave, Noah Goodman, Fynn Heide, Johannes Heidecke, Dan Hendrycks, Cyrus Hodes, Bryan Low Kian Hsiang, Minlie Huang, Sami Jawhar, Wang Jingyu, Adam Tauman Kalai, Meindert Kamphuis, Mohan Kankanhalli, Subhash Kantamneni, Mathias Bonde Kirk, Thomas Kwa, Jeffrey Ladish, Kwok-Yan Lam, Wan Lee Sie, Taewhi Lee, Xiaojian Li, Jiajun Liu, Chaochao Lu, Yifan Mai, Richard Mallah, Julian Michael, Nick Moës, Simon Möller, Kihyuk Nam, Kwan Yee Ng, Mark Nitzberg, Besmira Nushi, Seán O hÉigeartaigh, Alejandro Ortega, Pierre Peigné, James Petrie, Benjamin Prud'Homme, Reihaneh Rabbany, Nayat Sanchez-Pi, Sarah Schwettmann, Buck Shlegeris, Saad Siddiqui, Aradhana Sinha, Martín Soto, Cheston Tan, Dong Ting, William Tjhi, Robert Trager, Brian Tse, Anthony Tung K. H., Vanessa Wilfred, John Willes, Denise Wong, Wei Xu, Rongwu Xu, Yi Zeng, HongJiang Zhang, Djordje Žikelić,
• Abstract summary: "2025 Singapore Conference on AI (SCAI): International Scientific Exchange on AI Safety" aimed to support research in this space.<n>Report builds on the International AI Safety Report chaired by Yoshua Bengio and backed by 33 governments.<n>Report organises AI safety research domains into three types: challenges with creating trustworthy AI systems (Development), challenges with evaluating their risks (Assessment) and challenges with monitoring and intervening after deployment (Control)
• Score: 128.58674892183657
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Rapidly improving AI capabilities and autonomy hold significant promise of transformation, but are also driving vigorous debate on how to ensure that AI is safe, i.e., trustworthy, reliable, and secure. Building a trusted ecosystem is therefore essential -- it helps people embrace AI with confidence and gives maximal space for innovation while avoiding backlash. The "2025 Singapore Conference on AI (SCAI): International Scientific Exchange on AI Safety" aimed to support research in this space by bringing together AI scientists across geographies to identify and synthesise research priorities in AI safety. This resulting report builds on the International AI Safety Report chaired by Yoshua Bengio and backed by 33 governments. By adopting a defence-in-depth model, this report organises AI safety research domains into three types: challenges with creating trustworthy AI systems (Development), challenges with evaluating their risks (Assessment), and challenges with monitoring and intervening after deployment (Control).

Related papers

• Report on NSF Workshop on Science of Safe AI [75.96202715567088]
  New advances in machine learning are leading to new opportunities to develop technology-based solutions to societal problems.<n>To fulfill the promise of AI, we must address how to develop AI-based systems that are accurate and performant but also safe and trustworthy.<n>This report is the result of the discussions in the working groups that addressed different aspects of safety at the workshop.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-24T18:55:29Z)
• 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.<n>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'<n>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)
• Why do Experts Disagree on Existential Risk and P(doom)? A Survey of AI Experts [0.0]
  Research on catastrophic risks and AI alignment is often met with skepticism by experts.<n>Online debate over the existential risk of AI has begun to turn tribal.<n>I surveyed 111 AI experts on their familiarity with AI safety concepts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-25T01:51:29Z)
• Trustworthy, Responsible, and Safe AI: A Comprehensive Architectural Framework for AI Safety with Challenges and Mitigations [15.946242944119385]
  AI Safety is an emerging area of critical importance to the safe adoption and deployment of AI systems.<n>Our goal is to promote advancement in AI safety research, and ultimately enhance people's trust in digital transformation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-23T09:33:48Z)
• 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)
• Taking control: Policies to address extinction risks from AI [0.0]
  We argue that voluntary commitments from AI companies would be an inappropriate and insufficient response. We describe three policy proposals that would meaningfully address the threats from advanced AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-31T15:53:14Z)
• Artificial Intelligence Security Competition (AISC) [52.20676747225118]
  The Artificial Intelligence Security Competition (AISC) was organized by the Zhongguancun Laboratory, China Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team, Institute for Artificial Intelligence, Tsinghua University, and RealAI. The competition consists of three tracks, including Deepfake Security Competition, Autonomous Driving Security Competition, and Face Recognition Security Competition. This report will introduce the competition rules of these three tracks and the solutions of top-ranking teams in each track.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-07T02:45:27Z)
• Trustworthy AI: A Computational Perspective [54.80482955088197]
  We focus on six of the most crucial dimensions in achieving trustworthy AI: (i) Safety & Robustness, (ii) Non-discrimination & Fairness, (iii) Explainability, (iv) Privacy, (v) Accountability & Auditability, and (vi) Environmental Well-Being. For each dimension, we review the recent related technologies according to a taxonomy and summarize their applications in real-world systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-12T14:21:46Z)
• TanksWorld: A Multi-Agent Environment for AI Safety Research [5.218815947097599]
  The ability to create artificial intelligence capable of performing complex tasks is rapidly outpacing our ability to ensure the safe and assured operation of AI-enabled systems. Recent simulation environments to illustrate AI safety risks are relatively simple or narrowly-focused on a particular issue. We introduce the AI safety TanksWorld as an environment for AI safety research with three essential aspects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-25T21:00:52Z)

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.