teleo/teleo-codex
8
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 22 Pull requests 1 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 1

entity-batch: update 1 entities
Some checks are pending
Sync Graph Data to teleo-app / sync (push) Waiting to run
Details

Browse source 
- Applied 1 entity operations from queue
- Files: domains/ai-alignment/pre-deployment-AI-evaluations-do-not-predict-real-world-risk-creating-institutional-governance-built-on-unreliable-foundations.md

Pentagon-Agent: Epimetheus <968B2991-E2DF-4006-B962-F5B0A0CC8ACA>
This commit is contained in:
Teleo Agents 2026-03-26 01:05:12 +00:00
parent e86df50104
commit b3c06598dd
1 changed files with 10 additions and 0 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

10
domains/ai-alignment/pre-deployment-AI-evaluations-do-not-predict-real-world-risk-creating-institutional-governance-built-on-unreliable-foundations.md
View file

@ -82,6 +82,16 @@ Prandi et al. provide the specific mechanism for why pre-deployment evaluations
Anthropic's stated rationale for extending evaluation intervals from 3 to 6 months explicitly acknowledges that 'the science of model evaluation isn't well-developed enough' and that rushed evaluations produce lower-quality results. This is a direct admission from a frontier lab that current evaluation methodologies are insufficiently mature to support the governance structures built on them. The 'zone of ambiguity' where capabilities approached but didn't definitively pass thresholds in v2.0 demonstrates that evaluation uncertainty creates governance paralysis. Anthropic's stated rationale for extending evaluation intervals from 3 to 6 months explicitly acknowledges that 'the science of model evaluation isn't well-developed enough' and that rushed evaluations produce lower-quality results. This is a direct admission from a frontier lab that current evaluation methodologies are insufficiently mature to support the governance structures built on them. The 'zone of ambiguity' where capabilities approached but didn't definitively pass thresholds in v2.0 demonstrates that evaluation uncertainty creates governance paralysis.
### Auto-enrichment (near-duplicate conversion, similarity=1.00)
*Source: PR #1936 — "pre deployment ai evaluations do not predict real world risk creating institutional governance built on unreliable foundations"*
*Auto-converted by substantive fixer. Review: revert if this evidence doesn't belong here.*
### Additional Evidence (extend)
*Source: [[2026-03-26-anthropic-activating-asl3-protections]] | Added: 2026-03-26*
Anthropic's ASL-3 activation demonstrates that evaluation uncertainty compounds near capability thresholds: 'dangerous capability evaluations of AI models are inherently challenging, and as models approach our thresholds of concern, it takes longer to determine their status.' The Virology Capabilities Test showed 'steadily increasing' performance across model generations, but Anthropic could not definitively confirm whether Opus 4 crossed the threshold—they activated protections based on trend trajectory and inability to rule out crossing rather than confirmed measurement.
--- ---
### Additional Evidence (confirm) ### Additional Evidence (confirm)