analiza aiqbench
This is a theoretical preprint on statistical certification for dangerous-capability evaluations of AI agents. It shows how many clean (zero-success) audit results are needed to bound an agent's completion probability, and how evaluators should allocate testing effort across milestones. Its guarantees depend on a transport assumption that the audit itself cannot verify, which matters for anyone relying on such evaluations to justify deployment decisions.
Clean Sheets and Checkpoints: Evidence Complexity for Certifying Sequential Agent Risk
arXiv:2610.39124v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Dangerous-capability evaluations often test an AI agent from prepared states at ordered milestones. A clean sheet records no successes. What it certifies about a campaign of $B$ attempts depends on what a failed attempt erases. We model the task as a chain of $k$ milestones divided into checkpoint segments and ask how many zero audit responses certify, at level $\alpha$, a completion probability of at most $\epsilon$. For segments chosen before the audit, counting possible completion windows gives a certificate for any specified budget. The bound also covers adaptive deployment processes that follow the chain's transitions, provided their success probabilities after every complete history are capped by the corresponding audit success probabilities. The audit does not test this transport assumption. In rare-risk phase interiors, each segment is either rarely completed within the budget (active) or nearly always completed (free). The minimum expected number of zero responses is asymptotic to $\log(1/\alpha)\,(B^a/(a!\,\epsilon))^{1/K_A}$, where the $a$ active segments contain $K_A$ milestones and are those at least as long as a budget-dependent threshold. The certificate attains this constant. Every asymptotically optimal evaluator must divide its expected response count equally among active milestones in the limit, with a vanishing share elsewhere. Where a single segment passes from active to free, each of its milestones receives a smaller limiting share than an active milestone; a crossover-aware certificate attains the optimal constant. For selected segments with known or unqueried prefix steps, counting failed cycles can sharpen the certificate.
Abstract:Dangerous-capability evaluations often test an AI agent from prepared states at ordered milestones. A clean sheet records no successes. What it certifies about a campaign of $B$ attempts depends on what a failed attempt erases. We model the task as a chain of $k$ milestones divided into checkpoint segments and ask how many zero audit responses certify, at level $\alpha$, a completion probability of at most $\epsilon$. For segments chosen before the audit, counting possible completion windows gives a certificate for any specified budget. The bound also covers adaptive deployment processes that follow the chain's transitions, provided their success probabilities after every complete history are capped by the corresponding audit success probabilities. The audit does not test this transport assumption. In rare-risk phase interiors, each segment is either rarely completed within the budget (active) or nearly always completed (free). The minimum expected number of zero responses is asymptotic to $\log(1/\alpha)\,(B^a/(a!\,\epsilon))^{1/K_A}$, where the $a$ active segments contain $K_A$ milestones and are those at least as long as a budget-dependent threshold. The certificate attains this constant. Every asymptotically optimal evaluator must divide its expected response count equally among active milestones in the limit, with a vanishing share elsewhere. Where a single segment passes from active to free, each of its milestones receives a smaller limiting share than an active milestone; a crossover-aware certificate attains the optimal constant. For selected segments with known or unqueried prefix steps, counting failed cycles can sharpen the certificate.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.39124 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2610.39124v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.39124 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 · 338 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Collapse, Not Complexity: Failure-Conditioned Decomposition Repair for End-to-End Document Parsing
arXiv · 22 sept. 2026

Helix: The internal tool powering our Shopify app's native migration
Shopify Engineering Blog · 21 sept. 2026
Compass in the Mirror: Quantum Backpropagation with the Hopf Ansatz
arXiv · 14 oct. 2026
H$^2$R: Hierarchical Hint-Based Reward for Mathematical Reasoning via Reinforcement Learning
arXiv · 30 oct. 2026