Increased Compute Efficiency and the Diffusion of AI Capabilities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Training advanced AI models requires large investments in computational resources, or compute. Yet, as hardware innovation reduces the price of compute and algorithmic advances make its use more efficient, the cost of training an AI model to a given performance falls over time - a concept we describe as increasing compute efficiency. We find that while an access effect increases the number of actors who can train models to a given performance over time, a performance effect simultaneously increases the performance available to each actor. This potentially enables large compute investors to pioneer new capabilities, maintaining a performance advantage even as capabilities diffuse. Since large compute investors tend to develop new capabilities first, it will be particularly important that they share information about their AI models, evaluate them for emerging risks, and, more generally, make responsible development and release decisions. Further, as compute efficiency increases, governments will need to prepare for a world where dangerous AI capabilities are widely available - for instance, by developing defenses against harmful AI models or by actively intervening in the diffusion of particularly dangerous capabilities.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it