REVIEW 10 cited by
Structured access: an emerging paradigm for safe AI deployment
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Structured access is an emerging paradigm for the safe deployment of artificial intelligence (AI). Instead of openly disseminating AI systems, developers facilitate controlled, arm's length interactions with their AI systems. The aim is to prevent dangerous AI capabilities from being widely accessible, whilst preserving access to AI capabilities that can be used safely. The developer must both restrict how the AI system can be used, and prevent the user from circumventing these restrictions through modification or reverse engineering of the AI system. Structured access is most effective when implemented through cloud-based AI services, rather than disseminating AI software that runs locally on users' hardware. Cloud-based interfaces provide the AI developer greater scope for controlling how the AI system is used, and for protecting against unauthorized modifications to the system's design. This chapter expands the discussion of "publication norms" in the AI community, which to date has focused on the question of how the informational content of AI research projects should be disseminated (e.g., code and models). Although this is an important question, there are limits to what can be achieved through the control of information flows. Structured access views AI software not only as information that can be shared but also as a tool with which users can have arm's length interactions. There are early examples of structured access being practiced by AI developers, but there is much room for further development, both in the functionality of cloud-based interfaces and in the wider institutional framework.
Forward citations
Cited by 10 Pith papers
-
The Oracle's Gambit: A Game-Theoretic Framework for Responsible AI Release
Defender welfare in AI-enabled cyber contests depends on the capability gap from sequenced access, not shared model level, so pre-release is the lab's equilibrium strategy.
-
The Ethics of Autonomous AI Agents for Offensive Security
Autonomous AI hacking tools combine three kinds of indeterminacy—action, impact, and users—making moral responsibility diffuse and giving attackers a short-term advantage under current cost asymmetries.
-
An Example Safety Case for Safeguards Against Misuse
A proposed framework, built around an 'uplift model' that translates red-team safeguard-evasion data into estimated risk, for justifying that AI misuse safeguards keep large-scale harm risk below a threshold.
-
Towards Responsible Governing AI Proliferation
The paper proposes a 'Proliferation' paradigm of AI, where small, hidden, augmented, decentralized, and open-weight models challenge compute-centric governance.
-
Technical Requirements for Halting Dangerous AI Activities
A taxonomy of compute-centric technical interventions, graded by readiness and mapped to five AI governance plans, argues that halting dangerous AI requires substantial control over AI compute.
-
Considerations Influencing Offense-Defense Dynamics From Artificial Intelligence
The paper introduces the Offense-Defense Dynamics Framework, a taxonomy of six sociotechnical elements that shape offensive and defensive uses of AI.
-
GPAI Evaluations Standards Taskforce: Towards Effective AI Governance
The paper proposes an EU GPAI Evaluation Standards Taskforce to develop adaptive standards for AI evaluations, based on four desiderata: internal validity, external validity, reproducibility, and portability.
-
Position Paper: Model Access should be a Key Concern in AI Governance
Model access decisions should be studied and coordinated through a dedicated research field, with recommendations for evaluators, companies, governments, and international bodies.
-
AI Safety Frameworks Should Include Procedures for Model Access Decisions
The paper introduces Responsible Access Policies as a recommended component of frontier AI safety frameworks for governing model access.
-
The Societal Impact of Foundation Models: Advancing Evidence-based AI Policy
A dissertation that synthesizes prior work on foundation models into a three-part framework: conceptual framing, empirical measurement (HELM, FMTI), and evidence-based AI policy.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.