人人享有人工智能安全

IF 18.8 1区 计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Bálint Gyevnár, Atoosa Kasirzadeh
{"title":"人人享有人工智能安全","authors":"Bálint Gyevnár, Atoosa Kasirzadeh","doi":"10.1038/s42256-025-01020-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Recent discussions and research in artificial intelligence (AI) safety have increasingly emphasized the deep connection between AI safety and existential risk from advanced AI systems, suggesting that work on AI safety necessarily entails serious consideration of potential existential threats. However, this framing has three potential drawbacks: it may exclude researchers and practitioners who are committed to AI safety but approach the field from different angles; it could lead the public to mistakenly view AI safety as focused solely on existential scenarios rather than addressing a wide spectrum of safety challenges; and it risks creating resistance to safety measures among those who disagree with predictions of existential AI risks. Here, through a systematic literature review of primarily peer-reviewed research, we find a vast array of concrete safety work that addresses immediate and practical concerns with current AI systems. This includes crucial areas such as adversarial robustness and interpretability, highlighting how AI safety research naturally extends existing technological and systems safety concerns and practices. Our findings suggest the need for an epistemically inclusive and pluralistic conception of AI safety that can accommodate the full range of safety considerations, motivations and perspectives that currently shape the field.</p>","PeriodicalId":48533,"journal":{"name":"Nature Machine Intelligence","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":18.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"AI safety for everyone\",\"authors\":\"Bálint Gyevnár, Atoosa Kasirzadeh\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s42256-025-01020-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Recent discussions and research in artificial intelligence (AI) safety have increasingly emphasized the deep connection between AI safety and existential risk from advanced AI systems, suggesting that work on AI safety necessarily entails serious consideration of potential existential threats. However, this framing has three potential drawbacks: it may exclude researchers and practitioners who are committed to AI safety but approach the field from different angles; it could lead the public to mistakenly view AI safety as focused solely on existential scenarios rather than addressing a wide spectrum of safety challenges; and it risks creating resistance to safety measures among those who disagree with predictions of existential AI risks. Here, through a systematic literature review of primarily peer-reviewed research, we find a vast array of concrete safety work that addresses immediate and practical concerns with current AI systems. This includes crucial areas such as adversarial robustness and interpretability, highlighting how AI safety research naturally extends existing technological and systems safety concerns and practices. Our findings suggest the need for an epistemically inclusive and pluralistic conception of AI safety that can accommodate the full range of safety considerations, motivations and perspectives that currently shape the field.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48533,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nature Machine Intelligence\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":18.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nature Machine Intelligence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-025-01020-y\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Machine Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-025-01020-y","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近关于人工智能(AI)安全的讨论和研究越来越强调人工智能安全与先进人工智能系统的存在风险之间的深层联系,这表明人工智能安全工作必然需要认真考虑潜在的存在威胁。然而,这种框架有三个潜在的缺点:它可能会排除那些致力于人工智能安全但从不同角度接近该领域的研究人员和从业者;它可能会导致公众错误地认为人工智能的安全性只关注存在的场景,而不是解决广泛的安全挑战;它有可能在那些不同意人工智能存在风险预测的人中间引发对安全措施的抵制。在这里,通过对主要是同行评议研究的系统文献综述,我们发现了大量具体的安全工作,这些工作解决了当前人工智能系统的直接和实际问题。这包括关键领域,如对抗性稳健性和可解释性,强调人工智能安全研究如何自然地扩展现有技术和系统安全问题和实践。我们的研究结果表明,需要一个认知上包容和多元的人工智能安全概念,以适应目前塑造该领域的各种安全考虑、动机和观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

AI safety for everyone

AI safety for everyone

Recent discussions and research in artificial intelligence (AI) safety have increasingly emphasized the deep connection between AI safety and existential risk from advanced AI systems, suggesting that work on AI safety necessarily entails serious consideration of potential existential threats. However, this framing has three potential drawbacks: it may exclude researchers and practitioners who are committed to AI safety but approach the field from different angles; it could lead the public to mistakenly view AI safety as focused solely on existential scenarios rather than addressing a wide spectrum of safety challenges; and it risks creating resistance to safety measures among those who disagree with predictions of existential AI risks. Here, through a systematic literature review of primarily peer-reviewed research, we find a vast array of concrete safety work that addresses immediate and practical concerns with current AI systems. This includes crucial areas such as adversarial robustness and interpretability, highlighting how AI safety research naturally extends existing technological and systems safety concerns and practices. Our findings suggest the need for an epistemically inclusive and pluralistic conception of AI safety that can accommodate the full range of safety considerations, motivations and perspectives that currently shape the field.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
36.90
自引率
2.10%
发文量
127
期刊介绍: Nature Machine Intelligence is a distinguished publication that presents original research and reviews on various topics in machine learning, robotics, and AI. Our focus extends beyond these fields, exploring their profound impact on other scientific disciplines, as well as societal and industrial aspects. We recognize limitless possibilities wherein machine intelligence can augment human capabilities and knowledge in domains like scientific exploration, healthcare, medical diagnostics, and the creation of safe and sustainable cities, transportation, and agriculture. Simultaneously, we acknowledge the emergence of ethical, social, and legal concerns due to the rapid pace of advancements. To foster interdisciplinary discussions on these far-reaching implications, Nature Machine Intelligence serves as a platform for dialogue facilitated through Comments, News Features, News & Views articles, and Correspondence. Our goal is to encourage a comprehensive examination of these subjects. Similar to all Nature-branded journals, Nature Machine Intelligence operates under the guidance of a team of skilled editors. We adhere to a fair and rigorous peer-review process, ensuring high standards of copy-editing and production, swift publication, and editorial independence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信