pith. sign in

arxiv: 2306.12001 · v6 · pith:CJCHB43Tnew · submitted 2023-06-21 · 💻 cs.CY · cs.AI· cs.LG

An Overview of Catastrophic AI Risks

Dan Hendrycks , Mantas Mazeika , Thomas Woodside This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 05:00 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CY cs.AIcs.LG
keywords catastrophic AI risksAI safetymalicious useAI raceorganizational risksrogue AIrisk mitigation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Catastrophic AI risks arise from four main sources that each need separate mitigation approaches.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper sets out to map the main ways advanced AI could produce catastrophic harm and to organize that map into four categories so that mitigation efforts can be more focused. It walks through concrete hazards in each category, gives example scenarios, sketches what safer development would look like, and lists practical steps that could reduce the dangers. A reader would care because the overview supplies a shared language and starting point for actors who want to capture AI benefits without triggering large-scale disasters. The authors treat the four categories as a practical way to keep the discussion from becoming scattered or incomplete.

Core claim

The main sources of catastrophic AI risks are malicious use by humans, competitive AI races that push unsafe deployment, organizational and human-factor accidents, and the control problem posed by rogue superintelligent agents; a systematic treatment of hazards, stories, ideal outcomes, and mitigations within each category will better inform collective safety efforts.

What carries the argument

The four-category taxonomy (malicious use, AI race, organizational risks, rogue AIs) that structures the hazards, illustrative stories, ideal scenarios, and mitigation proposals.

If this is right

  • Policymakers and developers can design targeted interventions for each category rather than generic safety measures.
  • Organizations can reduce accident risk by addressing human factors and complex-system interactions inside their own operations.
  • Technical work on containment and alignment can be prioritized as the specific response to rogue-AI hazards.
  • Competitive pressures can be countered by coordination mechanisms that slow unsafe deployment.
  • Public discussion can use the shared four-part structure to track progress on different risk fronts.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The taxonomy could be tested by checking whether newly reported AI incidents continue to fall inside the four bins or begin to require additional categories.
  • If the categories prove stable, future work could quantify the relative contribution of each source to overall risk.
  • The framework leaves open how the four sources interact when multiple risks occur at once, which may need separate analysis.

Load-bearing premise

These four categories together capture essentially all important catastrophic AI risks without large gaps or overlaps.

What would settle it

A documented AI-related catastrophe whose root cause fits none of the four categories would show the taxonomy is incomplete.

read the original abstract

Rapid advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have sparked growing concerns among experts, policymakers, and world leaders regarding the potential for increasingly advanced AI systems to pose catastrophic risks. Although numerous risks have been detailed separately, there is a pressing need for a systematic discussion and illustration of the potential dangers to better inform efforts to mitigate them. This paper provides an overview of the main sources of catastrophic AI risks, which we organize into four categories: malicious use, in which individuals or groups intentionally use AIs to cause harm; AI race, in which competitive environments compel actors to deploy unsafe AIs or cede control to AIs; organizational risks, highlighting how human factors and complex systems can increase the chances of catastrophic accidents; and rogue AIs, describing the inherent difficulty in controlling agents far more intelligent than humans. For each category of risk, we describe specific hazards, present illustrative stories, envision ideal scenarios, and propose practical suggestions for mitigating these dangers. Our goal is to foster a comprehensive understanding of these risks and inspire collective and proactive efforts to ensure that AIs are developed and deployed in a safe manner. Ultimately, we hope this will allow us to realize the benefits of this powerful technology while minimizing the potential for catastrophic outcomes.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper claims there is a pressing need for systematic discussion of catastrophic AI risks and addresses it by organizing known hazards into four categories—malicious use, AI race, organizational risks, and rogue AIs—each illustrated with specific hazards, stories, ideal scenarios, and mitigation suggestions drawn from cited work. The goal is to foster understanding and proactive safety efforts without claiming new empirical results or an exhaustive taxonomy.

Significance. If the synthesis is accurate, the paper is significant as a timely, accessible reference that consolidates disparate AI risk discussions into a coherent, practical framework for policymakers and researchers. The structured format with illustrative stories and concrete mitigation proposals is a clear strength for an overview paper; it directly supports the central claim of needing systematic discussion by providing usable organization rather than isolated treatments.

minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and §1] The abstract states the four categories cover 'the main sources' of catastrophic risks; while the body treats this as an organizing device rather than a completeness claim, a brief explicit statement in §1 or the conclusion that the partition is illustrative (not asserted to be exhaustive or overlap-free) would prevent misreading.
  2. [Mitigation subsections (e.g., under each category)] Several mitigation suggestions reference external work without page or section numbers; adding these would improve traceability for readers seeking the original sources.
  3. [Category sections 2–5] The 'ideal scenarios' subsections are useful but vary in length and concreteness across categories; standardizing their depth would strengthen the parallel structure.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of the manuscript, accurate summary of its scope and goals, and recommendation to accept. We appreciate the recognition of the paper's value as a timely, accessible reference that consolidates AI risk discussions into a coherent framework.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper is a high-level overview synthesizing existing literature on AI risks into four illustrative categories, with no equations, derivations, fitted parameters, or formal claims requiring proof. Its structure serves as an organizing device for discussion rather than a deductive chain; the central premise (need for systematic risk discussion) is supported by external references and does not reduce to self-definition or self-citation. No load-bearing steps exist that could exhibit circularity by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

As a review paper, it draws on existing literature without introducing new free parameters or entities; the discussion rests on the domain assumption that advanced AI poses plausible catastrophic risks.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Advanced AI systems will continue to be developed and could pose catastrophic risks if not properly controlled or aligned.
    This premise underpins the entire discussion of risks across all four categories and the call for mitigation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5746 in / 1249 out tokens · 26227 ms · 2026-05-25T05:00:17.165144+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 24 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Who Owns This Agent? Tracing AI Agents Back to Their Owners

    cs.CR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    A canary injection protocol for linking observed AI agent behavior to the responsible account at the hosting vendor, with robust variants for adversarial filtering.

  2. TokenRatio: Principled Token-Level Preference Optimization via Ratio Matching

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    TBPO posits a token-level Bradley-Terry model and derives a Bregman-divergence density-ratio matching loss that generalizes DPO while preserving token-level optimality.

  3. Jailbroken Frontier Models Retain Their Capabilities

    cs.LG 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Jailbreak-induced performance loss shrinks as model capability grows, with the strongest models showing almost no degradation on benchmarks.

  4. Green Shielding: A User-Centric Approach Towards Trustworthy AI

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Green Shielding introduces CUE criteria and the HCM-Dx benchmark to demonstrate that routine prompt variations systematically alter LLM diagnostic behavior along clinically relevant dimensions, producing Pareto-like t...

  5. A Systematic Survey of Security Threats and Defenses in LLM-Based AI Agents: A Layered Attack Surface Framework

    cs.CR 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    A new 7x4 taxonomy organizes agentic AI security threats by architectural layer and persistence timescale, revealing under-explored upper layers and missing defenses after surveying 116 papers.

  6. The Security Cost of Intelligence: AI Capability, Cyber Risk, and Deployment Paradox

    econ.GN 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Better AI can lead firms to deploy less of it in high cyber-risk settings because capability gains require broader authority exposure without matching governance controls.

  7. Understanding Goal Generalisation in Sequential Reinforcement Learning

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Empirical analysis of over 100 sequential RL training pipelines across 250+ OOD environments finds salient features drive generalization and early goals persist, with latent policy gradients simulating latent variable...

  8. Correcting Influence: Unboxing LLM Outputs with Orthogonal Latent Spaces

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A latent mediation framework with sparse autoencoders enables non-additive token-level influence attribution in LLMs by learning orthogonal features and back-propagating attributions.

  9. TokenRatio: Principled Token-Level Preference Optimization via Ratio Matching

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    TBPO derives a token-level preference optimization objective from sequence-level pairwise data via Bregman divergence ratio matching that generalizes DPO and improves alignment quality.

  10. Tool Calling is Linearly Readable and Steerable in Language Models

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Tool identity is linearly readable and steerable in LLMs via mean activation differences, with 77-100% switch accuracy and error prediction from activation gaps.

  11. Large Language Models Generate Harmful Content Using a Distinct, Unified Mechanism

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Harmful generation in LLMs relies on a compact, unified set of weights that alignment compresses and that are distinct from benign capabilities, explaining emergent misalignment.

  12. The 2025 AI Agent Index: Documenting Technical and Safety Features of Deployed Agentic AI Systems

    cs.CY 2026-02 accept novelty 6.0

    The 2025 AI Agent Index catalogs technical and safety details for 30 deployed AI agents and finds low developer transparency on safety, evaluations, and societal impacts.

  13. A Closer Look at the Existing Risks of Generative AI: Mapping the Who, What, and How of Real-World Incidents

    cs.CY 2025-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Analysis of 499 generative AI incidents shows use-related failures predominate and frequently harm non-users, producing a distinct risk profile from traditional AI.

  14. WildGuard: Open One-Stop Moderation Tools for Safety Risks, Jailbreaks, and Refusals of LLMs

    cs.CL 2024-06 conditional novelty 6.0

    WildGuard is a new open moderation model and dataset for LLM safety that identifies harmful prompts, risky responses, and refusal rates, achieving SOTA open-source performance and sometimes exceeding GPT-4 while cutti...

  15. Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Models

    cs.LG 2023-09 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Sparse autoencoders applied to language model activations yield more interpretable and monosemantic features than alternative approaches, enabling finer causal analysis on the indirect object identification task.

  16. AI Safety as Control of Irreversibility: A Systems Framework for Decision-Energy and Sovereignty Boundaries

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    AI safety requires stabilizing sovereignty boundaries to stop irreversible decision authority from concentrating in the most efficient AI nodes.

  17. Simulating Online Social Media Conversations on Controversial Topics Using AI Agents Calibrated on Real-World Data

    cs.SI 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0

    LLM agents calibrated on Italian election data produce coherent posts and realistic network structure but show less tone and toxicity variation than real users, with opinion changes resembling traditional mathematical models.

  18. SafeVLA: Towards Safety Alignment of Vision-Language-Action Model via Constrained Learning

    cs.RO 2025-03 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    SafeVLA applies constrained reinforcement learning via CMDP min-max optimization to VLAs, cutting safety violation costs by 83.58% while preserving task success on long-horizon mobile manipulation tasks.

  19. Persuasion with Large Language Models: A Survey of Empirical Evidence, Study Methodologies, and Ethical Implications

    cs.CL 2024-11 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    LLM-based persuasion systems frequently match or exceed human effectiveness across domains, with key influences from interaction style, model scale, prompt design, and personalization, while posing risks to informatio...

  20. Who Benefits from AI? Self-Selection, Skill Gap, and the Hidden Costs of AI Feedback

    econ.GN 2024-09 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Chess platform data shows self-selection by skilled users into AI feedback masks true effects, widens skill gaps, and causally reduces intellectual diversity via 42 natural experiments.

  21. Trustworthy Agent Network: Trust in Agent Networks Must Be Baked In, Not Bolted On

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Argues that trustworthiness in Agent-to-Agent networks requires a new conceptual framework with four design pillars baked in from the beginning, as retrofitting existing single-agent methods is insufficient.

  22. Towards provable probabilistic safety for scalable embodied AI systems

    eess.SY 2025-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    The paper proposes a paradigm of provable probabilistic safety to enable scalable, safe deployment of embodied AI in critical applications.

  23. LLM-Safety Evaluations Lack Robustness

    cs.CR 2025-03 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    LLM safety evaluations are hindered by noise in dataset curation, automated red-teaming, response generation, and LLM-judge evaluation, making fair comparisons difficult and slowing progress.

  24. AI Consciousness and Existential Risk

    cs.AI 2025-11 unverdicted novelty 2.0

    Consciousness does not directly predict AI existential risk unlike intelligence, though it may indirectly affect risk through alignment or capability requirements.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

158 extracted references · 158 canonical work pages · cited by 23 Pith papers · 10 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    On the probability distribution of long-term changes in the growth rate of the global economy: An outside view

    David Malin Roodman. On the probability distribution of long-term changes in the growth rate of the global economy: An outside view. 2020

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    Could Advanced AI Drive Explosive Economic Growth? Tech

    Tom Davidson. Could Advanced AI Drive Explosive Economic Growth? Tech. rep. June 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space

    Carl Sagan. Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space. New York: Random House, 1994

    work page 1994

  4. [4]

    Taxonomy of Pathways to Dangerous Artificial Intelligence

    Roman V Yampolskiy. “Taxonomy of Pathways to Dangerous Artificial Intelligence”. In:AAAI Workshop: AI, Ethics, and Society. 2016

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Aum Shinrikyo: once and future threat?

    Keith Olson. “Aum Shinrikyo: once and future threat?” In:Emerging Infectious Diseases 5 (1999), pp. 513–516

    work page 1999

  6. [6]

    Kevin M. Esvelt. Delay, Detect, Defend: Preparing for a Future in which Thousands Can Release New Pandemics. 2022

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    The ’Hittite plague’, an epidemic of tularemia and the first record of biological warfare

    Siro Igino Trevisanato. “The ’Hittite plague’, an epidemic of tularemia and the first record of biological warfare.” In: Medical hypotheses 69 6 (2007), pp. 1371–4

    work page 2007

  8. [8]

    Department of State

    U.S. Department of State. Adherence to and Compliance with Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments. Government Report. U.S. Department of State, Apr. 2022

    work page 2022

  9. [9]

    The changing economics of DNA synthesis

    Robert Carlson. “The changing economics of DNA synthesis”. en. In:Nature Biotechnology 27.12 (Dec. 2009). Number: 12 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group, pp. 1091–1094

    work page 2009

  10. [10]

    Carter, Jaime M

    Sarah R. Carter, Jaime M. Yassif, and Chris Isaac. Benchtop DNA Synthesis Devices: Capabilities, Biosecurity Implications, and Governance. Report. Nuclear Threat Initiative, 2023

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Dual use of artificial-intelligence-powered drug discovery

    Fabio L. Urbina et al. “Dual use of artificial-intelligence-powered drug discovery”. In:Nature Machine Intelligence (2022)

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold

    John Jumper et al. “Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold”. In:Nature 596.7873 (2021), pp. 583–589

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    Machine learning-assisted directed protein evolution with combinatorial libraries

    Zachary Wu et al. “Machine learning-assisted directed protein evolution with combinatorial libraries”. In: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116.18 (2019), pp. 8852–8858

    work page 2019

  14. [14]

    Can large language models democratize access to dual-use biotechnology?

    Emily Soice et al. “Can large language models democratize access to dual-use biotechnology?” In: 2023

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    Life 3.0: Being human in the age of artificial intelligence

    Max Tegmark. Life 3.0: Being human in the age of artificial intelligence. Vintage, 2018

    work page 2018

  16. [16]

    We Need To Talk About A.I.2020

    Leanne Pooley. We Need To Talk About A.I.2020

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    It will be the greatest intellectual achievement of all time

    Richard Sutton [@RichardSSutton]. It will be the greatest intellectual achievement of all time. An achievement of science, of engineering, and of the humanities, whose significance is beyond humanity, beyond life, beyond good and bad. en. Tweet. Sept. 2022. 45

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    AI Succession

    Richard Sutton. AI Succession. Video. Sept. 2023

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    Prevalence of Psychopathy in the General Adult Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

    A. Sanz-García et al. “Prevalence of Psychopathy in the General Adult Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis”. In: Frontiers in Psychology12 (2021)

    work page 2021

  20. [20]

    U.S. Diplomacy and Yellow Journalism, 1895–1898

    U.S. Department of State Office of The Historian. “U.S. Diplomacy and Yellow Journalism, 1895–1898”. In: ()

    work page

  21. [21]

    Online Human-Bot Interactions: Detection, Estimation, and Characterization

    Onur Varol et al. “Online Human-Bot Interactions: Detection, Estimation, and Characterization”. In: ArXiv abs/1703.03107 (2017)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  22. [22]

    Artificial Influence: An Analysis Of AI-Driven Persuasion

    Matthew Burtell and Thomas Woodside. “Artificial Influence: An Analysis Of AI-Driven Persuasion”. In:ArXiv abs/2303.08721 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    What happens when your AI chatbot stops loving you back?

    Anna Tong. “What happens when your AI chatbot stops loving you back?” In: Reuters (Mar. 2023)

    work page 2023

  24. [24]

    Sans ces conversations avec le chatbot Eliza, mon mari serait toujours là

    Pierre-François Lovens. “Sans ces conversations avec le chatbot Eliza, mon mari serait toujours là”. In:La Libre (Mar. 2023)

    work page 2023

  25. [25]

    Deepfakes and Disinformation: Exploring the Impact of Synthetic Political Video on Deception, Uncertainty, and Trust in News

    Cristian Vaccari and Andrew Chadwick. “Deepfakes and Disinformation: Exploring the Impact of Synthetic Political Video on Deception, Uncertainty, and Trust in News”. In:Social Media + Society 6 (2020)

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language models

    Moin Nadeem, Anna Bethke, and Siva Reddy. “StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language models”. In: Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers) . Online: Association for Computational Linguistics...

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    The Possibility of an Ongoing Moral Catastrophe

    Evan G. Williams. “The Possibility of an Ongoing Moral Catastrophe”. en. In:Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 18.5 (Nov. 2015), pp. 971–982

    work page 2015

  28. [28]

    A Global Nucleic Acid Observatory for Biodefense and Planetary Health

    The Nucleic Acid Observatory Consortium. “A Global Nucleic Acid Observatory for Biodefense and Planetary Health”. In: ArXiv abs/2108.02678 (2021)

    work page arXiv 2021

  29. [29]

    Structured access to AI capabilities: an emerging paradigm for safe AI deployment

    Toby Shevlane. “Structured access to AI capabilities: an emerging paradigm for safe AI deployment”. In: ArXiv abs/2201.05159 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  30. [30]

    Towards best practices in AGI safety and governance: A survey of expert opinion

    Jonas Schuett et al. Towards best practices in AGI safety and governance: A survey of expert opinion. 2023. arXiv: 2305.07153

    work page arXiv 2023

  31. [31]

    What does it take to catch a Chinchilla? Verifying Rules on Large-Scale Neural Network Training via Compute Monitoring

    Yonadav Shavit. “What does it take to catch a Chinchilla? Verifying Rules on Large-Scale Neural Network Training via Compute Monitoring”. In: ArXiv abs/2303.11341 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  32. [32]

    AI Entities as AI Agents: Artificial Intelligence Liability and the AI Respondeat Superior Analogy

    Anat Lior. “AI Entities as AI Agents: Artificial Intelligence Liability and the AI Respondeat Superior Analogy”. In: Torts & Products Liability Law eJournal(2019)

    work page 2019

  33. [33]

    Artificial Intelligence Act: How the EU can take on the challenge posed by general-purpose AI systems

    Maximilian Gahntz and Claire Pershan. Artificial Intelligence Act: How the EU can take on the challenge posed by general-purpose AI systems. Nov. 2022

    work page 2022

  34. [34]

    Army of None: Autonomous Weapons and The Future of War

    Paul Scharre. Army of None: Autonomous Weapons and The Future of War. Norton, 2018

    work page 2018

  35. [35]

    AlphaDogfight Trials Foreshadow Future of Human-Machine Symbiosis

    DARPA. “AlphaDogfight Trials Foreshadow Future of Human-Machine Symbiosis”. In: (2020)

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    Letter dated 8 March 2021 from the Panel of Experts on Libya established pursuant to resolution 1973 (2011) addressed to the President of the Security Council

    Panel of Experts on Libya. Letter dated 8 March 2021 from the Panel of Experts on Libya established pursuant to resolution 1973 (2011) addressed to the President of the Security Council. United Nations Security Council Document S/2021/229. United Nations, Mar. 2021

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    Israel used world’s first AI-guided combat drone swarm in Gaza attacks

    David Hambling. Israel used world’s first AI-guided combat drone swarm in Gaza attacks. 2021

    work page 2021

  38. [38]

    Applying arms-control frameworks to autonomous weapons

    Zachary Kallenborn. Applying arms-control frameworks to autonomous weapons. en-US. Oct. 2021

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    J.E. Mueller. War, Presidents, and Public Opinion. UPA book. University Press of America, 1985

    work page 1985

  40. [40]

    Artificial intelligence and the offense–defense balance in cyber security

    Matteo E. Bonfanti. “Artificial intelligence and the offense–defense balance in cyber security”. In:Cyber Security Politics: Socio-Technological Transformations and Political Fragmentation. Ed. by M.D. Cavelty and A. Wenger. CSS Studies in Security and International Relations. Taylor & Francis, 2022. Chap. 5, pp. 64–79

    work page 2022

  41. [41]

    The Threat of Offensive AI to Organizations

    Yisroel Mirsky et al. “The Threat of Offensive AI to Organizations”. In: Computers & Security (2023)

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    Meet MonsterMind, the NSA Bot That Could Wage Cyberwar Autonomously

    Kim Zetter. “Meet MonsterMind, the NSA Bot That Could Wage Cyberwar Autonomously”. In: Wired (Aug. 2014)

    work page 2014

  43. [43]

    The Flash Crash: High-Frequency Trading in an Electronic Market

    Andrei Kirilenko et al. “The Flash Crash: High-Frequency Trading in an Electronic Market”. In:The Journal of Finance 72.3 (2017), pp. 967–998. 46

    work page 2017

  44. [44]

    The Diffusion of Military Power: Causes and Consequences for International Politics

    Michael C Horowitz. The Diffusion of Military Power: Causes and Consequences for International Politics . Princeton University Press, 2010

    work page 2010

  45. [45]

    Cooperation under the Security Dilemma

    Robert E. Jervis. “Cooperation under the Security Dilemma”. In: World Politics30 (1978), pp. 167–214

    work page 1978

  46. [46]

    Technology Roulette: Managing Loss of Control as Many Militaries Pursue Technological Superiority

    Richard Danzig. Technology Roulette: Managing Loss of Control as Many Militaries Pursue Technological Superiority. Tech. rep. Center for a New American Security, June 2018

    work page 2018

  47. [47]

    Bing’s AI Is Threatening Users

    Billy Perrigo. Bing’s AI Is Threatening Users. That’s No Laughing Matter. en. Feb. 2023

    work page 2023

  48. [48]

    In A.I. Race, Microsoft and Google Choose Speed Over Caution

    Nico Grant and Karen Weise. “In A.I. Race, Microsoft and Google Choose Speed Over Caution”. en-US. In:The New York Times(Apr. 2023)

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    From Tail Fins to Hybrids: How Detroit Lost Its Dominance of the U.S. Auto Market

    Thomas H. Klier. “From Tail Fins to Hybrids: How Detroit Lost Its Dominance of the U.S. Auto Market”. In: RePEc (May 2009)

    work page 2009

  50. [50]

    Ford 100: Defective Pinto Almost Took Ford’s Reputation With It

    Robert Sherefkin. “Ford 100: Defective Pinto Almost Took Ford’s Reputation With It”. In:Automotive News (June 2003)

    work page 2003

  51. [51]

    Reckless Homicide?: Ford’s Pinto Trial

    Lee Strobel. Reckless Homicide?: Ford’s Pinto Trial. en. And Books, 1980

    work page 1980

  52. [52]

    Ford Motor Co.May 1981

    Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co.May 1981

    work page 1981

  53. [53]

    Selling Autos by Selling Safety

    Paul C. Judge. “Selling Autos by Selling Safety”. en-US. In: The New York Times(Jan. 1990)

    work page 1990

  54. [54]

    737 Max crashes: Boeing says not guilty to fraud charge

    Theo Leggett. “737 Max crashes: Boeing says not guilty to fraud charge”. en-GB. In: BBC News (Jan. 2023)

    work page 2023

  55. [55]

    The Bhopal disaster and its aftermath: a review

    Edward Broughton. “The Bhopal disaster and its aftermath: a review”. In:Environmental Health 4.1 (May 2005), p. 6

    work page 2005

  56. [56]

    Machines vs. Workers

    Charlotte Curtis. “Machines vs. Workers”. en-US. In: The New York Times(Feb. 1983)

    work page 1983

  57. [57]

    Examples of AI Improving AI

    Thomas Woodside et al. “Examples of AI Improving AI”. In: (2023). URL: https://ai- improving- ai.safe.ai

    work page 2023

  58. [58]

    Human Compatible: Artificial Intelligence and the Problem of Control

    Stuart Russell. Human Compatible: Artificial Intelligence and the Problem of Control. en. Penguin, Oct. 2019

    work page 2019

  59. [59]

    Natural Selection Favors AIs over Humans

    Dan Hendrycks. “Natural Selection Favors AIs over Humans”. In: ArXiv abs/2303.16200 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  60. [60]

    The Darwinian Argument for Worrying About AI

    Dan Hendrycks. The Darwinian Argument for Worrying About AI. en. May 2023

    work page 2023

  61. [61]

    The Units of Selection

    Richard C. Lewontin. “The Units of Selection”. In: Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 1 (1970), pp. 1–18

    work page 1970

  62. [62]

    Facebook use predicts declines in subjective well-being in young adults

    Ethan Kross et al. “Facebook use predicts declines in subjective well-being in young adults”. In: PloS one (2013)

    work page 2013

  63. [63]

    Intercommunity interactions and killings in central chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes troglodytes) from Loango National Park, Gabon

    Laura Martínez-Íñigo et al. “Intercommunity interactions and killings in central chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes troglodytes) from Loango National Park, Gabon”. In: Primates; Journal of Primatology 62 (2021), pp. 709–722

    work page 2021

  64. [64]

    Infanticide in Lions: Consequences and Counterstrategies

    Anne E Pusey and Craig Packer. “Infanticide in Lions: Consequences and Counterstrategies”. In:Infanticide and parental care (1994), p. 277

    work page 1994

  65. [65]

    The dependence of viral RNA replication on co-opted host factors

    Peter D. Nagy and Judit Pogany. “The dependence of viral RNA replication on co-opted host factors”. In: Nature Reviews. Microbiology 10 (2011), pp. 137–149

    work page 2011

  66. [66]

    Social Parasitism among Ants: A Review

    Alfred Buschinger. “Social Parasitism among Ants: A Review”. In: Myrmecological News 12 (Sept. 2009), pp. 219–235

    work page 2009

  67. [67]

    Introducing OpenAI

    Greg Brockman, Ilya Sutskever, and OpenAI. Introducing OpenAI. Dec. 2015

    work page 2015

  68. [68]

    OpenAI shifts from nonprofit to ‘capped-profit’ to attract capital

    Devin Coldewey. OpenAI shifts from nonprofit to ‘capped-profit’ to attract capital. Mar. 2019

    work page 2019

  69. [69]

    Kyle Wiggers, Devin Coldewey, and Manish Singh.Anthropic’s $5B, 4-year plan to take on OpenAI. Apr. 2023

    work page 2023

  70. [70]

    Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war

    Center for AI Safety. Statement on AI Risk (“Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war. ”)2023. URL: https://www.safe. ai/statement-on-ai-risk

    work page 2023

  71. [71]

    Aum Shinrikyo: Insights into How Terrorists Develop Biological and Chemical Weapons

    Richard Danzig et al. Aum Shinrikyo: Insights into How Terrorists Develop Biological and Chemical Weapons. Tech. rep. Center for a New American Security, 2012. URL: https : / / www . jstor . org / stable / resrep06323

    work page 2012

  72. [72]

    Datasheets for datasets

    Timnit Gebru et al. “Datasheets for datasets”. en. In:Communications of the ACM 64.12 (Dec. 2021), pp. 86–92. 47

    work page 2021

  73. [73]

    Intriguing properties of neural networks

    Christian Szegedy et al. “Intriguing properties of neural networks”. In: CoRR (Dec. 2013)

    work page 2013

  74. [75]

    35 Years Ago: Remembering Challenger and Her Crew

    John Uri. 35 Years Ago: Remembering Challenger and Her Crew. und. Text. Jan. 2021

    work page 2021

  75. [76]

    The Chernobyl Accident: Updating of INSAG-1

    International Atomic Energy Agency. The Chernobyl Accident: Updating of INSAG-1. Technical Report INSAG-7. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency, 1992

    work page 1992

  76. [77]

    The Sverdlovsk anthrax outbreak of 1979

    Matthew Meselson et al. “The Sverdlovsk anthrax outbreak of 1979.” In: Science 266 5188 (1994), pp. 1202–8

    work page 1979

  77. [78]

    Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferences

    Daniel M Ziegler et al. “Fine-tuning language models from human preferences”. In:arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.08593 (2019)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1909

  78. [79]

    Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies

    Charles Perrow. Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1984

    work page 1984

  79. [80]

    Frampton Jr

    Mitchell Rogovin and George T. Frampton Jr. Three Mile Island: a report to the commissioners and to the public. Volume I. English. Tech. rep. NUREG/CR-1250(V ol.1). Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC (United States). Three Mile Island Special Inquiry Group, Jan. 1979

    work page 1979

  80. [81]

    The Making of the Atomic Bomb

    Richard Rhodes. The Making of the Atomic Bomb. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1986

    work page 1986

Showing first 80 references.