Assessing the risk of takeover catastrophe from large language models.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2024-06-30 DOI:10.1111/risa.14353
Seth D Baum
{"title":"Assessing the risk of takeover catastrophe from large language models.","authors":"Seth D Baum","doi":"10.1111/risa.14353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article presents a risk analysis of large language models (LLMs), a type of \"generative\" artificial intelligence (AI) system that produces text, commonly in response to textual inputs from human users. The article is specifically focused on the risk of LLMs causing an extreme catastrophe in which they do something akin to taking over the world and killing everyone. The possibility of LLM takeover catastrophe has been a major point of public discussion since the recent release of remarkably capable LLMs such as ChatGPT and GPT-4. This arguably marks the first time when actual AI systems (and not hypothetical future systems) have sparked concern about takeover catastrophe. The article's analysis compares (A) characteristics of AI systems that may be needed for takeover, as identified in prior theoretical literature on AI takeover risk, with (B) characteristics observed in current LLMs. This comparison reveals that the capabilities of current LLMs appear to fall well short of what may be needed for takeover catastrophe. Future LLMs may be similarly incapable due to fundamental limitations of deep learning algorithms. However, divided expert opinion on deep learning and surprise capabilities found in current LLMs suggests some risk of takeover catastrophe from future LLMs. LLM governance should monitor for changes in takeover characteristics and be prepared to proceed more aggressively if warning signs emerge. Unless and until such signs emerge, more aggressive governance measures may be unwarranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":21472,"journal":{"name":"Risk Analysis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.14353","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article presents a risk analysis of large language models (LLMs), a type of "generative" artificial intelligence (AI) system that produces text, commonly in response to textual inputs from human users. The article is specifically focused on the risk of LLMs causing an extreme catastrophe in which they do something akin to taking over the world and killing everyone. The possibility of LLM takeover catastrophe has been a major point of public discussion since the recent release of remarkably capable LLMs such as ChatGPT and GPT-4. This arguably marks the first time when actual AI systems (and not hypothetical future systems) have sparked concern about takeover catastrophe. The article's analysis compares (A) characteristics of AI systems that may be needed for takeover, as identified in prior theoretical literature on AI takeover risk, with (B) characteristics observed in current LLMs. This comparison reveals that the capabilities of current LLMs appear to fall well short of what may be needed for takeover catastrophe. Future LLMs may be similarly incapable due to fundamental limitations of deep learning algorithms. However, divided expert opinion on deep learning and surprise capabilities found in current LLMs suggests some risk of takeover catastrophe from future LLMs. LLM governance should monitor for changes in takeover characteristics and be prepared to proceed more aggressively if warning signs emerge. Unless and until such signs emerge, more aggressive governance measures may be unwarranted.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从大型语言模型评估收购灾难风险。
本文对大型语言模型(LLMs)进行了风险分析,LLMs 是一种 "生成式 "人工智能(AI)系统,通常根据人类用户的文本输入生成文本。这篇文章特别关注 LLM 造成极端灾难的风险,在这种灾难中,LLM 会做出类似于接管世界并杀死所有人的行为。自从 ChatGPT 和 GPT-4 等能力出众的 LLM 最近发布以来,LLM 接管灾难的可能性一直是公众讨论的焦点。可以说,这是实际人工智能系统(而非假设的未来系统)首次引发人们对接管灾难的担忧。文章分析比较了(A) 人工智能接管风险理论文献中指出的可能需要接管的人工智能系统的特征,以及(B) 在当前 LLM 中观察到的特征。比较结果表明,当前 LLM 的能力似乎远远达不到发生接管灾难所需的能力。由于深度学习算法的根本局限性,未来的 LLM 可能同样无法胜任。不过,专家们对当前 LLM 的深度学习和突袭能力的意见不一,这表明未来的 LLM 可能会带来一些接管灾难风险。LLM 管理层应监控收购特征的变化,并做好准备,一旦出现警示信号,就会更积极地进行收购。除非出现这种迹象,否则可能没有必要采取更激进的治理措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Risk Analysis
Risk Analysis 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
10.50%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4.2 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the Society for Risk Analysis, Risk Analysis is ranked among the top 10 journals in the ISI Journal Citation Reports under the social sciences, mathematical methods category, and provides a focal point for new developments in the field of risk analysis. This international peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing critical empirical research and commentaries dealing with risk issues. The topics covered include: • Human health and safety risks • Microbial risks • Engineering • Mathematical modeling • Risk characterization • Risk communication • Risk management and decision-making • Risk perception, acceptability, and ethics • Laws and regulatory policy • Ecological risks.
期刊最新文献
The development of resilience research in critical infrastructure systems: A bibliometric perspective Exploring dynamic public trust in mega infrastructure projects during online public opinion crises of extreme climate emergencies: Users' behaviors, trust dimensions, and effectiveness of strategies. Time in hand: Temporal focus in risk discourse and audience emotions on knowledge-sharing platforms. You cannot spell risk without "I-S": The disclosure of information systems risks by Fortune 1000 firms. Issue Information ‐ TOC
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1