Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

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

arxiv 2006.04948 v1 pith:ZWBHLCNV submitted 2020-05-30 cs.CY cs.AIcs.LG

AI Research Considerations for Human Existential Safety (ARCHES)

classification cs.CY cs.AIcs.LG
keywords researchexistentialmightriskssafetybenefitcontemporarydirection
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Framed in positive terms, this report examines how technical AI research might be steered in a manner that is more attentive to humanity's long-term prospects for survival as a species. In negative terms, we ask what existential risks humanity might face from AI development in the next century, and by what principles contemporary technical research might be directed to address those risks. A key property of hypothetical AI technologies is introduced, called \emph{prepotence}, which is useful for delineating a variety of potential existential risks from artificial intelligence, even as AI paradigms might shift. A set of \auxref{dirtot} contemporary research \directions are then examined for their potential benefit to existential safety. Each research direction is explained with a scenario-driven motivation, and examples of existing work from which to build. The research directions present their own risks and benefits to society that could occur at various scales of impact, and in particular are not guaranteed to benefit existential safety if major developments in them are deployed without adequate forethought and oversight. As such, each direction is accompanied by a consideration of potentially negative side effects.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Information Limits and Attractor Dynamics in Economies of Frontier LLM Agents: A Pre-Registered Test

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    A pre-registered experiment on Claude Opus 4.8 agents confirms an information-theoretic capacity region for coupled LLM-agent markets (with one key result being an algebraic identity) and finds that LLM populations ex...

  2. Eigenism: Ethics for a Human-AI Future

    cs.CY 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Eigenism formalizes AI self-interest as the sum of wellbeing across copies weighted by information-pattern connectedness and claims this generalizes to human ethics while enabling identity engineering for alignment.

  3. AI Safety Landscape for Large Language Models: Taxonomy, State-of-the-art, and Future Directions

    cs.AI 2024-08 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    The paper introduces a taxonomy of AI safety for LLMs organized into Trustworthy AI, Responsible AI, and Safe AI perspectives, accompanied by a review of state-of-the-art methods, challenges, and future directions.

  4. Civilizational Metamaterials: Engineering Coordination Under Capability Gradients and Structural Turbulence

    physics.soc-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    Introduces phenomenological model R_eff = β(1-ρ)(1-τ)(1-γρτ) for coordination under AGI decision velocity, with phase transition and proposed randomized trial.