Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@xpe
Last active June 13, 2024 16:06
Show Gist options
  • Save xpe/0124cbf3221339abf375f95effc702df to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save xpe/0124cbf3221339abf375f95effc702df to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Synthesizing Expert Knowledge on AI Safety Risks

MEMORANDUM

TO: Head of AI Safety, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)

SUBJECT: Synthesizing Expert Knowledge on AI Safety Risks

Problem Statement

How can NIST best synthesize a diversity of expert knowledge on AI safety?

Executive Summary

NIST plays a crucial role in fostering innovation and mitigating risks associated with AI. Synthesizing diverse knowledge of AI experts demands more than traditional approaches. Status-quo workshop formats are inadequate mechanisms to achieve NIST's mission. Luckily, better approaches are readily available.

Options

  1. Traditional: Rely on established NIST workshop processes

  2. Novel: Explore lesser-known methods

  3. Hybrid: Blend traditional approaches with new techniques

Analysis

While traditional NIST workshops have some merits, they have major drawbacks:

  • To the extent agendas are predetermined, top-down, and inflexible, they hinder iterative reframing by participants

  • Feedback methods may be burdensome to NIST staff and unengaging to participants

  • Lack of emphasis on creating shared risk models and artifacts hinders shared learning

  • Limited participant input on deliverables misses opportunities for iterative refinement

Novel methods offer promising alternatives:

  • Collaborative argument mapping visually represents the structure of debates, helping identify areas of agreement, disagreement, and gaps.

  • Collaborative Bayesian network building enables experts to jointly model the complex interplay of risk factors and uncertainties.

  • Scenario planning workshops help surface plausible future risks and foster preparedness.

  • Participatory system mapping engages experts in visualizing the dynamics shaping AI safety, leading to shared understanding and identification of intervention points.

  • Prediction markets aggregate diverse opinions and incentivize careful reasoning about AI safety outcomes.

Recommendations

  • Take proactive steps to ensure that existing power structures will not undermine an unbiased exploration of novel methods.

  • Allocate funding and resources in ways that encourage positive-sum thinking to prevent infighting.

  • Bring in outside expert facilitators experienced with these novel collaborative methods.

  • Craft a strategy that accentuates experimentation in the workshop process itself.

  • Form hypotheses about the pros and cons of many methods (traditional, novel, and hybrid). Design and test experiments. Iterate and refine, aiming towards a set of promising hybrid approaches.

  • After some number of iterations, run hybrid workshops. Continue to iterate and refine.

  • Update the organizational structure to reduce chances of workshop strategy lock-in.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment