Systemic Risks of Interacting AI

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.17793v1
• Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2025 16:59:53 GMT
• Title: Systemic Risks of Interacting AI
• Authors: Paul Darius, Thomas Hoppe, Andrei Aleksandrov,
• Abstract summary: We consider a multitude of systemic risk examples from existing literature.<n>We provide a taxonomy of identified risks that categorizes them in different groups.<n>We develop a graphical language "Agentology" for visualization of interacting AI systems.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: In this study, we investigate system-level emergent risks of interacting AI agents. The core contribution of this work is an exploratory scenario-based identification of these risks as well as their categorization. We consider a multitude of systemic risk examples from existing literature and develop two scenarios demonstrating emergent risk patterns in domains of smart grid and social welfare. We provide a taxonomy of identified risks that categorizes them in different groups. In addition, we make two other important contributions: first, we identify what emergent behavior types produce systemic risks, and second, we develop a graphical language "Agentology" for visualization of interacting AI systems. Our study opens a new research direction for system-level risks of interacting AI, and is the first to closely investigate them.

Related papers

• Frontier AI Risk Management Framework in Practice: A Risk Analysis Technical Report v1.5 [61.787178868669265]
  This technical report presents an updated and granular assessment of five critical dimensions: cyber offense, persuasion and manipulation, strategic deception, uncontrolled AI R&D, and self-replication.<n>This work reflects our current understanding of AI frontier risks and urges collective action to mitigate these challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-16T04:30:06Z)
• AI Deception: Risks, Dynamics, and Controls [153.71048309527225]
  This project provides a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of the AI deception field.<n>We identify a formal definition of AI deception, grounded in signaling theory from studies of animal deception.<n>We organize the landscape of AI deception research as a deception cycle, consisting of two key components: deception emergence and deception treatment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-27T16:56:04Z)
• Knowledge Conceptualization Impacts RAG Efficacy [0.0786430477112975]
  We investigate the design of transferable and interpretable neurosymbolic AI systems.<n>Specifically, we focus on a class of systems referred to as ''Agentic Retrieval-Augmented Generation'' systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-12T20:10:26Z)
• Adapting Probabilistic Risk Assessment for AI [0.0]
  General-purpose artificial intelligence (AI) systems present an urgent risk management challenge.<n>Current methods often rely on selective testing and undocumented assumptions about risk priorities.<n>This paper introduces the probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) for AI framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-25T17:59:14Z)
• AI Automatons: AI Systems Intended to Imitate Humans [54.19152688545896]
  There is a growing proliferation of AI systems designed to mimic people's behavior, work, abilities, likenesses, or humanness.<n>The research, design, deployment, and availability of such AI systems have prompted growing concerns about a wide range of possible legal, ethical, and other social impacts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-04T03:55:38Z)
• Multi-Agent Risks from Advanced AI [90.74347101431474]
  Multi-agent systems of advanced AI pose novel and under-explored risks.<n>We identify three key failure modes based on agents' incentives, as well as seven key risk factors.<n>We highlight several important instances of each risk, as well as promising directions to help mitigate them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-19T23:03:21Z)
• A Taxonomy of Systemic Risks from General-Purpose AI [2.5956465292067867]
  We consider systemic risks as large-scale threats that can affect entire societies or economies.<n>Key sources of systemic risk emerge from knowledge gaps, challenges in recognizing harm, and the unpredictable trajectory of AI development.<n>This paper contributes to AI safety research by providing a structured groundwork for understanding and addressing the potential large-scale negative societal impacts of general-purpose AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-24T22:16:18Z)
• From Silos to Systems: Process-Oriented Hazard Analysis for AI Systems [2.226040060318401]
  We translate System Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) for analyzing AI operation and development processes. We focus on systems that rely on machine learning algorithms and conductedA on three case studies. We find that key concepts and steps of conducting anA readily apply, albeit with a few adaptations tailored for AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T20:43:18Z)
• 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.<n>Foundation models as the "brain" of EAI agents for high-level task planning have shown promising results.<n>However, the deployment of these agents in physical environments presents significant safety challenges.<n>This study introduces EARBench, a novel framework for automated physical risk assessment in EAI scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T13:19:37Z)
• 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)

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.