Position: Require Frontier AI Labs To Release Small "Analog" Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.14053v1
• Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2025 19:47:49 GMT
• Title: Position: Require Frontier AI Labs To Release Small "Analog" Models
• Abstract summary: We argue for an alternative regulatory approach that ensures AI safety while actively promoting innovation.<n>Mandating that large AI laboratories release small, openly accessible analog models (scaled-down versions) trained similarly to and distilled from their largest proprietary models.
• Score: 2.4847319469475626
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent proposals for regulating frontier AI models have sparked concerns about the cost of safety regulation, and most such regulations have been shelved due to the safety-innovation tradeoff. This paper argues for an alternative regulatory approach that ensures AI safety while actively promoting innovation: mandating that large AI laboratories release small, openly accessible analog models (scaled-down versions) trained similarly to and distilled from their largest proprietary models. Analog models serve as public proxies, allowing broad participation in safety verification, interpretability research, and algorithmic transparency without forcing labs to disclose their full-scale models. Recent research demonstrates that safety and interpretability methods developed using these smaller models generalize effectively to frontier-scale systems. By enabling the wider research community to directly investigate and innovate upon accessible analogs, our policy substantially reduces the regulatory burden and accelerates safety advancements. This mandate promises minimal additional costs, leveraging reusable resources like data and infrastructure, while significantly contributing to the public good. Our hope is not only that this policy be adopted, but that it illustrates a broader principle supporting fundamental research in machine learning: deeper understanding of models relaxes the safety-innovation tradeoff and lets us have more of both.

Related papers

• Steering Externalities: Benign Activation Steering Unintentionally Increases Jailbreak Risk for Large Language Models [62.16655896700062]
  Activation steering is a technique to enhance the utility of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We show that it unintentionally introduces critical and under-explored safety risks.<n>Experiments reveal that these interventions act as a force multiplier, creating new vulnerabilities to jailbreaks and increasing attack success rates to over 80% on standard benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T12:32:35Z)
• Mitigating Cyber Risk in the Age of Open-Weight LLMs: Policy Gaps and Technical Realities [0.0]
  Open-weight general-purpose AI (GPAI) models offer significant benefits but also introduce substantial cybersecurity risks.<n>This paper analyzes the specific threats -- including accelerated malware development and enhanced social engineering -- magnified by open-weight AI release.<n>We propose a path forward focusing on evaluating and controlling specific high-risk capabilities rather than entire models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-21T11:35:52Z)
• The Hidden Risks of Large Reasoning Models: A Safety Assessment of R1 [70.94607997570729]
  We present a comprehensive safety assessment of OpenAI-o3 and DeepSeek-R1 reasoning models.<n>We investigate their susceptibility to adversarial attacks, such as jailbreaking and prompt injection, to assess their robustness in real-world applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T09:06:07Z)
• Safety at Scale: A Comprehensive Survey of Large Model and Agent Safety [296.5392512998251]
  We present a comprehensive taxonomy of safety threats to large models, including adversarial attacks, data poisoning, backdoor attacks, jailbreak and prompt injection attacks, energy-latency attacks, data and model extraction attacks, and emerging agent-specific threats.<n>We identify and discuss the open challenges in large model safety, emphasizing the need for comprehensive safety evaluations, scalable and effective defense mechanisms, and sustainable data practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-02T05:14:22Z)
• Beyond Benchmarks: On The False Promise of AI Regulation [13.125853211532196]
  We show that effective scientific regulation requires a causal theory linking observable test outcomes to future performance.<n>We show that deep learning models, which learn complex statistical patterns from training data without explicit causal mechanisms, preclude such guarantees.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-26T22:43:07Z)
• OpenAI o1 System Card [274.83891368890977]
  The o1 model series is trained with large-scale reinforcement learning to reason using chain of thought.<n>This report outlines the safety work carried out for the OpenAI o1 and OpenAI o1-mini models, including safety evaluations, external red teaming, and Preparedness Framework evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-21T18:04:31Z)
• Auction-Based Regulation for Artificial Intelligence [28.86995747151915]
  Regulators have moved slowly to pick up the safety, bias, and legal debris left in the wake of broken AI deployment.<n>We propose an auction-based regulatory mechanism that provably incentivizes devices to deploy compliant models.<n>We show that our regulatory auction boosts compliance rates by 20% and participation rates by 15% compared to baseline regulatory mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-02T17:57:02Z)
• PRISM: A Design Framework for Open-Source Foundation Model Safety [0.0]
  This paper addresses the question of how open foundation model developers should approach model safety. We introduce PRISM, a design framework for open-source foundation model safety that emphasizes Private, Robust, Independent Safety measures. PRISM aims to create a safer open-source ecosystem that maximizes the potential of these powerful technologies while minimizing the risks to individuals and society as a whole.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-14T21:26:15Z)
• Detectors for Safe and Reliable LLMs: Implementations, Uses, and Limitations [76.19419888353586]
  Large language models (LLMs) are susceptible to a variety of risks, from non-faithful output to biased and toxic generations. We present our efforts to create and deploy a library of detectors: compact and easy-to-build classification models that provide labels for various harms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-09T21:07:16Z)
• Frontier AI Regulation: Managing Emerging Risks to Public Safety [15.85618115026625]
  "Frontier AI" models could possess dangerous capabilities sufficient to pose severe risks to public safety. Industry self-regulation is an important first step. We propose an initial set of safety standards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-06T17:03:25Z)
• Evaluating Model-free Reinforcement Learning toward Safety-critical Tasks [70.76757529955577]
  This paper revisits prior work in this scope from the perspective of state-wise safe RL. We propose Unrolling Safety Layer (USL), a joint method that combines safety optimization and safety projection. To facilitate further research in this area, we reproduce related algorithms in a unified pipeline and incorporate them into SafeRL-Kit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-12T06:30:17Z)
• Regulatory Markets for AI Safety [1.1268254714512649]
  We propose a new model for regulation to achieve AI safety: global regulatory markets.<n>We first sketch the model in general terms and provide an overview of the costs and benefits of this approach.<n>We then demonstrate how the model might work in practice: responding to the risk of adversarial attacks on AI models employed in commercial drones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2019-12-11T19:21:54Z)

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.