Abstract:A concern about cutting-edge or "frontier" AI foundation models is that an adversary may use the models for preparing chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, (CBRN), cyber, or other attacks. At least two methods can identify foundation models with potential dual-use capability; each has advantages and disadvantages: A. Open benchmarks (based on openly available questions and answers), which are low-cost but accuracy-limited by the need to omit security-sensitive details; and B. Closed red team evaluations (based on private evaluation by CBRN and cyber experts), which are higher-cost but can achieve higher accuracy by incorporating sensitive details. We propose a research and risk-management approach using a combination of methods including both open benchmarks and closed red team evaluations, in a way that leverages advantages of both methods. We recommend that one or more groups of researchers with sufficient resources and access to a range of near-frontier and frontier foundation models run a set of foundation models through dual-use capability evaluation benchmarks and red team evaluations, then analyze the resulting sets of models' scores on benchmark and red team evaluations to see how correlated those are. If, as we expect, there is substantial correlation between the dual-use potential benchmark scores and the red team evaluation scores, then implications include the following: The open benchmarks should be used frequently during foundation model development as a quick, low-cost measure of a model's dual-use potential; and if a particular model gets a high score on the dual-use potential benchmark, then more in-depth red team assessments of that model's dual-use capability should be performed. We also discuss limitations and mitigations for our approach, e.g., if model developers try to game benchmarks by including a version of benchmark test data in a model's training data.

Coordinated Disclosure of Dual-Use Capabilities: An Early Warning System for Advanced AI

Coordinated Flaw Disclosure for AI: Beyond Security Vulnerabilities

Pre-Deployment Information Sharing: A Zoning Taxonomy for Precursory Capabilities

Governing dual-use technologies: Case studies of international security agreements and lessons for AI governance

Artificial Intelligence Strategies for National Security and Safety Standards

Coordinated pausing: An evaluation-based coordination scheme for frontier AI developers

Oversight for Frontier AI through a Know-Your-Customer Scheme for Compute Providers

AI Emergency Preparedness: Examining the federal government's ability to detect and respond to AI-related national security threats

Responsible Reporting for Frontier AI Development

Benchmark Early and Red Team Often: A Framework for Assessing and Managing Dual-Use Hazards of AI Foundation Models

Certified Safe: A Schematic for Approval Regulation of Frontier AI

International Institutions for Advanced AI

Advancing the Research and Development of Assured Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Capabilities

Societal Adaptation to Advanced AI

Commercial AI, Conflict, and Moral Responsibility: A theoretical analysis and practical approach to the moral responsibilities associated with dual-use AI technology

An International Consortium for Evaluations of Societal-Scale Risks from Advanced AI

Safety Cases: How to Justify the Safety of Advanced AI Systems

Affirmative safety: An approach to risk management for high-risk AI

Considerations Influencing Offense-Defense Dynamics From Artificial Intelligence

Artificial Intelligence Security in Multiple-Unmanned System Cooperation

A Technological Perspective on Misuse of Available AI