A safe harbor for AI evaluation and red teaming

An argument for legal and technical safe harbors for AI safety and trustworthiness research

This blog post is authored by Shayne Longpre, Sayash Kapoor, Kevin Klyman, Ashwin Ramaswami, Rishi Bommasani, Arvind Narayanan, Percy Liang, and Peter Henderson. The paper has 23 authors and is available here. Today, we are releasing an open letter encouraging AI companies to provide legal and technical protections for good-faith research on their AI models. The letter focuses on the importance of independent evaluations of proprietary generative AI models, particularly those with millions of users. In an accompanying paper, we discuss existing challenges to independent research and how a…

related reading

• The case for ensuring that powerful AIs are controlled — LessWronglesswrong.com
• Recommendations for Technical AI Safety Research Directionsalignment.anthropic.com
• AI Control: Improving Safety Despite Intentional Subversion — LessWronglesswrong.com
• A Safe Path to Open Weights - Thinking Machines Labthinkingmachines.ai
• AI safety is not a model propertysubstack.com
• AI Control: Improving Safety Despite Intentional Subversion — AI Alignment Forumalignmentforum.org
• [2312.06942] AI Control: Improving Safety Despite Intentional Subversionarxiv.org
• AI safety undervalues founders — LessWronglesswrong.com
• Recommendations-for-Using-Red-Teaming-for-AI-Accountability-PolicyBrief.pdfdatasociety.net
• AI models can be dangerous before public deploymentmetr.org
• [2004.07213] Toward Trustworthy AI Development: Mechanisms for Supporting Verifiable Claimsarxiv.org
• The case for ensuring that powerful AIs are controlledblog.redwoodresearch.org