Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Societal Adaptation to Advanced AI

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 2405.10295 v3 pith:CGIPTQPY submitted 2024-05-16 cs.CY cs.AIcs.HC

classification cs.CYcs.AIcs.HC
keywords advancedsystemsadaptationapproachcyclegivenharmfulimplement
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Existing strategies for managing risks from advanced AI systems often focus on affecting what AI systems are developed and how they diffuse. However, this approach becomes less feasible as the number of developers of advanced AI grows, and impedes beneficial use-cases as well as harmful ones. In response, we urge a complementary approach: increasing societal adaptation to advanced AI, that is, reducing the expected negative impacts from a given level of diffusion of a given AI capability. We introduce a conceptual framework which helps identify adaptive interventions that avoid, defend against and remedy potentially harmful uses of AI systems, illustrated with examples in election manipulation, cyberterrorism, and loss of control to AI decision-makers. We discuss a three-step cycle that society can implement to adapt to AI. Increasing society's ability to implement this cycle builds its resilience to advanced AI. We conclude with concrete recommendations for governments, industry, and third-parties.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 3 citations worldwide. Full citation record

  1. An Example Safety Case for Safeguards Against Misuse

    cs.LG 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    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.

  2. From Turing to Tomorrow: The UK's Approach to AI Regulation

    cs.CY 2025-07 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

    The UK should establish a flexible, principles-based regulator for frontier AI development, plus defensive measures against biological risks and updated legal frameworks for copyright, discrimination, and AI agents.

Pith tools