MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390870100

Incremental AI Risks from Proxy-Simulations

2023· preprint· en· W4390870100 on OpenAlexaff
Kristen Menou

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEthics and Social Impacts of AI
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProxy (statistics)Computer scienceEconometricsEconomicsMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerical simulations are versatile predictive tools that permit explorations of complex systems. The ability of LLM agents to simulate real-world scenarios will expand the AI risk landscape. In the proxysimulation threat model, a user (or a deceptively aligned AI) can obfuscate the goal behind simulationbased predictions by leveraging the generalizability of simulation tools. Three highly idealized proxysimulation examples are presented that illustrate how damage, casualties, and concealment of illegal activities can be planned for, in obfuscation. This approach bypasses existing alignment and safety filters (GPT4, Claude2 and LLama2). AI-enabled simulations facilitate access to prediction-based planning that is not otherwise readily available. To the extent that goal obfuscation is possible, this increases AI risk.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)Same topicEthics and Social Impacts of AIFrench-language works237,207