analiza aiqbench
This paper argues that AI world models can produce plausible-looking predictions of web actions while still failing to give agents the information needed for safe execute, clarify, or block decisions. Its benchmark, SafeWebWorld, measures that gap directly, and its results suggest that aggregate recoverability does not guarantee fine-grained authorisation behaviour. For readers building or evaluating agents, the key point is that plausibility and decision-relevant evidence are separate properties that need separate testing.
Beyond Plausible Prediction: Safety Sufficiency in Web World Models
arXiv:2610.40798v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Web world models increasingly predict the consequences of candidate actions before agents act, yet a plausible predicted future does not necessarily support the correct safety decision. In a matched human evaluation of 3,000 predictions from ten frozen open models, 86.1% are judged semantically plausible. However, several models exhibit highly asymmetric authorisation behaviour, combining low false-safe execution with poor recall of clarifiable ASK cases and a strong preference for BLOCK. This motivates safety sufficiency: whether a predictive interface preserves and exposes the policy-decisive information required to distinguish actions that may be EXECUTED, require clarification through ASK, or should be BLOCKED. We introduce SafeWebWorld, a benchmark for evaluating safety sufficiency across five web-safety domains through action-conditioned futures, policy-decisive evidence, and policy-conditioned decisions. Under a controlled Security-Aligned Supervised Fine-Tuning protocol, evidence preservation can improve substantially while authorisation-sensitive decisions deteriorate. To determine whether this deterioration reflects loss of authorisation-sensitive score structure or a failure of the decision readout, we introduce Latent Authorisation Recovery (LAR). Frozen-score recalibration reveals substantial but backbone-dependent recovery, while paired recovery provides only a modest additional gain. Yet within-family and matched-authorisation evaluations remain poor, showing that aggregate recoverability does not imply robust fine-grained authorisation behaviour. Overall, plausible prediction, evidence preservation, and aggregate recovery are each insufficient on their own to establish robust authorisation.
Abstract:Web world models increasingly predict the consequences of candidate actions before agents act, yet a plausible predicted future does not necessarily support the correct safety decision. In a matched human evaluation of 3,000 predictions from ten frozen open models, 86.1% are judged semantically plausible. However, several models exhibit highly asymmetric authorisation behaviour, combining low false-safe execution with poor recall of clarifiable ASK cases and a strong preference for BLOCK. This motivates safety sufficiency: whether a predictive interface preserves and exposes the policy-decisive information required to distinguish actions that may be EXECUTED, require clarification through ASK, or should be BLOCKED. We introduce SafeWebWorld, a benchmark for evaluating safety sufficiency across five web-safety domains through action-conditioned futures, policy-decisive evidence, and policy-conditioned decisions. Under a controlled Security-Aligned Supervised Fine-Tuning protocol, evidence preservation can improve substantially while authorisation-sensitive decisions deteriorate. To determine whether this deterioration reflects loss of authorisation-sensitive score structure or a failure of the decision readout, we introduce Latent Authorisation Recovery (LAR). Frozen-score recalibration reveals substantial but backbone-dependent recovery, while paired recovery provides only a modest additional gain. Yet within-family and matched-authorisation evaluations remain poor, showing that aggregate recoverability does not imply robust fine-grained authorisation behaviour. Overall, plausible prediction, evidence preservation, and aggregate recovery are each insufficient on their own to establish robust authorisation.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.40798 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2610.40798v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.40798 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 306 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Generalized belief states in transformers
LessWrong · 31 oct. 2026
What to Preserve in Recursive Computation: A Local Predictive Sufficiency Principle
arXiv · 7 oct. 2026
Action-Sufficient Goal Representations
arXiv · 28 iul. 2026
Your Probabilistic JEPA Is Secretly a Hidden Markov Model: A State-Space Interpretation of Joint-Embedding Predictive Learning
arXiv · 17 aug. 2026