arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.03189

Reducing Catastrophic Risk from AI with Systematic Monitoring and Evaluation of Rogue AI Progression

T. Bauer·W. P. Kegelmeyer·E. Begoli·A. Sadovnik·T. Emerson·C. Corley·N. Generous·J. Moore·B. Bartoldson·R. Goldhahn·M. Goldman·M. Greaves·M. J. D. Vermeer·B. MacLennan·D. Schulker·N. VanHoudnos·J. Bansemer·Y. Bengio
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This article presents a structured framework of behavioral indicators that may signal progression toward potentially catastrophic threats from artificial intelligence systems. We adopt a pragmatic approach, inspired by established methodologies in cybersecurity and national security. By establishing clear metrics, indicators, and thresholds across multiple dimensions of AI capability and behavior, this framework enables researchers and policymakers to implement evidence-based monitoring protocols.

Explore related subjects

cs.CYcs.AIcs.HC

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

T. Bauer, W. P. Kegelmeyer, E. Begoli, A. Sadovnik, T. Emerson, C. Corley, N. Generous, J. Moore, B. Bartoldson, R. Goldhahn, M. Goldman, M. Greaves, M. J. D. Vermeer, B. MacLennan, D. Schulker, N. VanHoudnos, J. Bansemer, Y. Bengio. 2026-09-04. Reducing Catastrophic Risk from AI with Systematic Monitoring and Evaluation of Rogue AI Progression. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.03189

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

cs.AI subjectcs.CY subjectcs.HC subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Experts Disagree on How to Fight AI Disinformation, but Agree That Health and Politics Need Different Solutions

When 54 international experts assessed AI-generated disinformation threats, they revealed a surprising pattern: while video deepfakes received the highest average threat ratings in the political domain (M = 6.31/7), the pattern differed in the health domain, where AI-generated text received the highest average rating (M = 5.80). Experts also diverge on what to do: government regulation drew both the most "most effective" (30%) and the most "least effective" (15%) votes, though rating distributions were contested rather than polarized, indicating disagreement over priorities rather than over efficacy. These findings offer an initial expert map of an AI-disinformation landscape that is still rapidly forming.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

Generativism: Toward a Learning Theory for the Age of Generative Artificial Intelligence

The four dominant learning theories of behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism, and connectivism show significant conceptual limitations as generative artificial intelligence (AI) proliferates in educational settings. These frameworks were formulated before the emergence of AI systems capable of generating, synthesizing, and reasoning about knowledge. This article critically examines each learning theory and identifies assumptions challenged by the affordances of generative AI. Drawing on research in distributed cognition, extended mind, human-AI collaboration, AI literacy, cognitive offloading, and metacognition, the article proposes Generativism as a learning theory for the generative AI age. Generativism posits that learning increasingly occurs through the iterative co-construction of knowledge between human learners and AI systems. The proposed framework is organized around four constructs (epistemic partnership, distributed agency, generative literacy, and adaptive metacognition) and four principles specifying the relations among them. The framework offers a foundation for rethinking instructional design, learning, assessment, and expertise development in contexts where generative AI plays an integral role in cognition.

cs.CY↗
arXiv2026

Generative AI Alignment with Hinduism's Theological Plurality and Sacred Representation

Generative AI systems are increasingly used to answer personal questions and mediate everyday practices, including religion. However, existing discussions around AI alignment and ethics have largely centered secular, Western, and Abrahamic assumptions about religion, offering limited attention to other faith-based traditions. In this paper, we examine how Hindu users engage with generative AI systems in relation to their religious knowledge, belief, and practice. Drawing on 15 semi-structured interviews with Bangladeshi Hindu participants, we analyze how users interpret AI-generated religious representations, scriptural explanations, devotional interactions, and synthetic religious media. We found that AI can be both accessible and ethically troubling. While AI supported scriptural inquiry, devotional visualization, and religious storytelling, our study also identified concerns about theological flattening, cultural misrepresentation, devotional manipulation, and the simulation of sacred presence and authority. We conclude by arguing that religious alignment in generative AI requires interpretive alignment: systems that disclose their limits, preserve plurality, and avoid simulating sacred authority and sycophantic personalization.

cs.AI↗