ForesightSafety Bench: A Frontier Risk Evaluation and Governance Framework towards Safe AI
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.14135v3
- Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2026 02:30:08 GMT
- Title: ForesightSafety Bench: A Frontier Risk Evaluation and Governance Framework towards Safe AI
- Authors: Haibo Tong, Feifei Zhao, Linghao Feng, Ruoyu Wu, Ruolin Chen, Lu Jia, Zhou Zhao, Jindong Li, Tenglong Li, Erliang Lin, Shuai Yang, Enmeng Lu, Yinqian Sun, Qian Zhang, Zizhe Ruan, Jinyu Fan, Zeyang Yue, Ping Wu, Huangrui Li, Chengyi Sun, Yi Zeng,
- Abstract summary: "ForesightSafety Bench" is a safety evaluation framework for cutting-edge AI models.<n>The benchmark has accumulated tens of thousands of structured risk data points and assessment results.<n>Based on this benchmark, we conduct systematic evaluation and in-depth analysis of over twenty mainstream advanced large models.
- Score: 38.70363180741332
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Rapidly evolving AI exhibits increasingly strong autonomy and goal-directed capabilities, accompanied by derivative systemic risks that are more unpredictable, difficult to control, and potentially irreversible. However, current AI safety evaluation systems suffer from critical limitations such as restricted risk dimensions and failed frontier risk detection. The lagging safety benchmarks and alignment technologies can hardly address the complex challenges posed by cutting-edge AI models. To bridge this gap, we propose the "ForesightSafety Bench" AI Safety Evaluation Framework, beginning with 7 major Fundamental Safety pillars and progressively extends to advanced Embodied AI Safety, AI4Science Safety, Social and Environmental AI risks, Catastrophic and Existential Risks, as well as 8 critical industrial safety domains, forming a total of 94 refined risk dimensions. To date, the benchmark has accumulated tens of thousands of structured risk data points and assessment results, establishing a widely encompassing, hierarchically clear, and dynamically evolving AI safety evaluation framework. Based on this benchmark, we conduct systematic evaluation and in-depth analysis of over twenty mainstream advanced large models, identifying key risk patterns and their capability boundaries. The safety capability evaluation results reveals the widespread safety vulnerabilities of frontier AI across multiple pillars, particularly focusing on Risky Agentic Autonomy, AI4Science Safety, Embodied AI Safety, Social AI Safety and Catastrophic and Existential Risks. Our benchmark is released at https://github.com/Beijing-AISI/ForesightSafety-Bench. The project website is available at https://foresightsafety-bench.beijing-aisi.ac.cn/.
Related papers
- Frontier AI Auditing: Toward Rigorous Third-Party Assessment of Safety and Security Practices at Leading AI Companies [57.521647436515785]
We define frontier AI auditing as rigorous third-party verification of frontier AI developers' safety and security claims.<n>We introduce AI Assurance Levels (AAL-1 to AAL-4), ranging from time-bounded system audits to continuous, deception-resilient verification.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-16T18:44:09Z) - Systematic Hazard Analysis for Frontier AI using STPA [0.0]
frontier AI companies currently do not describe in detail any structured approach to identifying and analysing hazards.<n>A (Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis) is a systematic methodology for identifying how complex systems can become unsafe, leading to hazards.<n>We evaluateA's ability to broaden the scope, improve traceability and strengthen the robustness of safety assurance for frontier AI systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-02T15:28:34Z) - Safety Co-Option and Compromised National Security: The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy of Weakened AI Risk Thresholds [0.0]
We show how "safety revisionism" has allowed AI technologists to engage in "safety revisionism"<n>We explore how the current trajectory for AI risk determination and evaluation for foundation model use within national security is poised for a race to the bottom.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-21T13:20:56Z) - Frontier AI's Impact on the Cybersecurity Landscape [46.32458228179959]
We find that while AI is already widely used in attacks, its application in defense remains limited.<n>Experts expect AI to continue favoring attackers over defenders, though the gap will gradually narrow.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-07T18:25:18Z) - 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.<n>This framing may exclude researchers and practitioners who are committed to AI safety but approach the field from different angles.<n>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) - 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) - Safetywashing: Do AI Safety Benchmarks Actually Measure Safety Progress? [59.96471873997733]
We propose an empirical foundation for developing more meaningful safety metrics and define AI safety in a machine learning research context.<n>We aim to provide a more rigorous framework for AI safety research, advancing the science of safety evaluations and clarifying the path towards measurable progress.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-31T17:59:24Z) - 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) - Towards Safer Generative Language Models: A Survey on Safety Risks,
Evaluations, and Improvements [76.80453043969209]
This survey presents a framework for safety research pertaining to large models.
We begin by introducing safety issues of wide concern, then delve into safety evaluation methods for large models.
We explore the strategies for enhancing large model safety from training to deployment.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-18T09:32:55Z)
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.