Almanac
← Events
6OpenAI Blog·1mo ago

AI Safety via Debate

OpenAI proposes a safety technique in which two AI agents debate a topic and a human judge determines the winner, with the goal of making it easier for humans to supervise AI systems that may be more capable than themselves. The core intuition is that it is easier to verify a correct argument than to generate one, so a dishonest agent can be caught by an honest opponent. The paper introduces debate as a scalable oversight mechanism applicable to complex tasks where direct human evaluation is infeasible.

Related guides (3)

Related events (8)

7Openai Blog·1mo ago·source ↗

Concrete Problems in AI Safety

OpenAI, Google Brain, Berkeley, and Stanford researchers co-authored 'Concrete Problems in AI Safety,' a foundational paper exploring research challenges in ensuring modern ML systems operate as intended. The paper identifies and frames specific technical safety problems for the field. Published in June 2016, it became a landmark reference for AI safety research agendas.

8Openai Blog·1mo ago·source ↗

OpenAI and Anthropic Share Findings from Joint Safety Evaluation

OpenAI and Anthropic conducted a first-of-its-kind cross-lab safety evaluation, testing each other's frontier models across dimensions including misalignment, instruction following, hallucinations, and jailbreaking resistance. The collaboration represents a novel form of inter-lab safety research cooperation. Findings highlight both progress and ongoing challenges in AI safety, and establish a potential template for future cross-organizational evaluations.

4One Useful Thing·1mo ago·source ↗

Giving your AI a Job Interview

This commentary piece argues that as AI-generated advice becomes more consequential, users need systematic methods to evaluate AI reliability and quality—analogous to a job interview process. The author proposes frameworks for assessing AI outputs before trusting them for important decisions. The piece addresses the practical challenge of calibrating trust in AI systems across different use cases.

4Openai Blog·1mo ago·source ↗

AI Safety Needs Social Scientists

OpenAI published a paper arguing that long-term AI safety research requires social scientists to address uncertainties in human psychology, rationality, emotion, and biases that affect alignment algorithms. The paper contends that aligning advanced AI with human values cannot be solved by machine learning alone. OpenAI announced plans to hire social scientists full-time to work on these problems.

5Openai Blog·1mo ago·source ↗

Improving Verifiability in AI Development: Multi-Stakeholder Report

OpenAI contributed to a multi-stakeholder report co-authored by 58 researchers across 30 organizations, including Mila, CSET, and the Schwartz Reisman Institute. The report identifies 10 mechanisms for improving the verifiability of claims about AI systems. These tools are intended to help developers demonstrate safety, security, fairness, and privacy properties, while enabling policymakers and civil society to evaluate AI development processes.

3Openai Blog·1mo ago·source ↗

Our approach to AI safety

OpenAI published a high-level overview of its approach to AI safety, framing safe development and deployment as central to its mission. The post appears to be a brief, top-level statement rather than a detailed technical or policy document. It signals OpenAI's public positioning on safety at a time of growing regulatory and public scrutiny.

5Openai Blog·1mo ago·source ↗

OpenAI Expands External Safety Testing Ecosystem

OpenAI published a post describing its use of independent experts to evaluate frontier AI systems through third-party testing. The initiative aims to strengthen safety validation, verify safeguards, and increase transparency around capability and risk assessments. The announcement signals a continued push toward external accountability mechanisms for frontier model evaluation.

4Hugging Face Blog·1mo ago·source ↗

Introducing AI vs. AI: A Deep Reinforcement Learning Multi-Agent Competition System

Hugging Face has launched 'AI vs. AI', a competition framework for evaluating deep reinforcement learning agents through head-to-head multi-agent matchups. The system is designed to benchmark RL agents against each other in competitive environments rather than static benchmarks. This represents a new evaluation paradigm for RL research hosted on the Hugging Face platform.