arXiv subjects

Yohan Mathew

Publications and source records attributed to Yohan Mathew.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2025

Who Evaluates AI's Social Impacts? Mapping Coverage and Gaps in First and Third Party Evaluations

Foundation models are increasingly central to high-stakes AI systems, and governance frameworks now depend on evaluations to assess their risks and capabilities. Although general capability evaluations are widespread, social impact assessments covering bias, fairness, privacy, environmental costs, and labor remain uneven. To characterize this landscape, we conduct the first comprehensive analysis of social impact evaluation reporting, examining 186 first-party release reports and 248 third-party evaluation sources, supplemented by developer interviews. We find a stark division of labor: first-party reporting is sparse, often superficial, and declining in areas like environmental impact and bias, while third-party evaluators provide broader, more rigorous coverage of bias, harmful content, and performance disparities. However, only developers can authoritatively report on data provenance, content moderation labor, costs, and infrastructure, yet interviews reveal these disclosures are deprioritized unless tied to product adoption or compliance. Current practices leave major gaps in assessing societal impacts, underscoring the need for policies that mandate developer transparency, strengthen independent evaluation ecosystems, and create shared infrastructure for aggregating third-party evaluations.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Dynamic safety cases for frontier AI

Frontier artificial intelligence (AI) systems present both benefits and risks to society. Safety cases - structured arguments supported by evidence - are one way to help ensure the safe development and deployment of these systems. Yet the evolving nature of AI capabilities, as well as changes in the operational environment and understanding of risk, necessitates mechanisms for continuously updating these safety cases. Typically, in other sectors, safety cases are produced pre-deployment and do not require frequent updates post-deployment, which can be a manual, costly process. This paper proposes a Dynamic Safety Case Management System (DSCMS) to support both the initial creation of a safety case and its systematic, semi-automated revision over time. Drawing on methods developed in the autonomous vehicles (AV) sector - state-of-the-art Checkable Safety Arguments (CSA) combined with Safety Performance Indicators (SPIs) recommended by UL 4600, a DSCMS helps developers maintain alignment between system safety claims and the latest system state. We demonstrate this approach on a safety case template for offensive cyber capabilities and suggest ways it can be integrated into governance structures for safety-critical decision-making. While the correctness of the initial safety argument remains paramount - particularly for high-severity risks - a DSCMS provides a framework for adapting to new insights and strengthening incident response. We outline challenges and further work towards development and implementation of this approach as part of continuous safety assurance of frontier AI systems.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Hidden in Plain Text: Emergence & Mitigation of Steganographic Collusion in LLMs

The rapid proliferation of frontier model agents promises significant societal advances but also raises concerns about systemic risks arising from unsafe interactions. Collusion to the disadvantage of others has been identified as a central form of undesirable agent cooperation. The use of information hiding (steganography) in agent communications could render such collusion practically undetectable. This underscores the need for investigations into the possibility of such behaviours emerging and the robustness corresponding countermeasures. To investigate this problem we design two approaches -- a gradient-based reinforcement learning (GBRL) method and an in-context reinforcement learning (ICRL) method -- for reliably eliciting sophisticated LLM-generated linguistic text steganography. We demonstrate, for the first time, that unintended steganographic collusion in LLMs can arise due to mispecified reward incentives during training. Additionally, we find that standard mitigations -- both passive oversight of model outputs and active mitigation through communication paraphrasing -- are not fully effective at preventing this steganographic communication. Our findings imply that (i) emergence of steganographic collusion is a plausible concern that should be monitored and researched, and (ii) preventing emergence may require innovation in mitigation techniques.

cs.CL↗