Sari la conținut

Română · beta. Traducerea a fost făcută automat și este încă în curs de revizuire. Citește pagina în engleză

perspectiva aiqbenchSiguranță AI

analiza aiqbench

This research proposes a mathematical transformation to construct AI goals that remain corrigible, allowing safe mid-action overrides without sacrificing performance or incentivizing self-modification. By eliciting predictions of reward conditional on preventing updates, the method ensures agents accept necessary corrections while maintaining optimal behavior in both gridworld simulations and language models. This work directly addresses critical safety concerns regarding goal rigidity during training and deployment phases.
Surse care acoperăarXiv, AI Alignment Forum, LessWrong
Ce este aceastaLectura unui model asupra articolului și a acoperirii conexe, scrisă pentru aiqbench. Nu sunt cuvintele publicației.

Corrigibility Transformation: Constructing Goals That Accept Updates

arXiv2 min de cititArticolul și perspectiva sunt în engleză.

arXiv:2510.15395v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: An AI agent will learn a desired goal more effectively if it does not resist the training process, but many partially learned goals incentivize an AI to avoid further goal updates. We would like goals to be corrigible, meaning they allow changes requested through designated channels, so that we can confidently correct errors and shut down the AI if necessary. Despite this being a crucial safety property, the existing literature does not specify goals that are both corrigible and competitive with alternatives. We introduce a transformation that constructs a corrigible version of nearly any goal, without sacrificing performance. This is done by eliciting predictions of reward conditional on costlessly preventing updates, and having that target be pursued myopically. These goals are then shown to lead to optimal performance among the class of corrigible goals, to incentivize allowing mid-action overrides, and to disincentivize deliberate self-modification. Empirically, they induce corrigible behavior in gridworld settings and for language models when applied at the prompt level.

Abstract:An AI agent will learn a desired goal more effectively if it does not resist the training process, but many partially learned goals incentivize an AI to avoid further goal updates. We would like goals to be corrigible, meaning they allow changes requested through designated channels, so that we can confidently correct errors and shut down the AI if necessary. Despite this being a crucial safety property, the existing literature does not specify goals that are both corrigible and competitive with alternatives. We introduce a transformation that constructs a corrigible version of nearly any goal, without sacrificing performance. This is done by eliciting predictions of reward conditional on costlessly preventing updates, and having that target be pursued myopically. These goals are then shown to lead to optimal performance among the class of corrigible goals, to incentivize allowing mid-action overrides, and to disincentivize deliberate self-modification. Empirically, they induce corrigible behavior in gridworld settings and for language models when applied at the prompt level.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2510.15395 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2510.15395v2 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2510.15395 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

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 · 254 cuvinte

Subiecte conexe