mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Actionable Guidance for High-Consequence AI Risk Management: Towards Standards Addressing AI Catastrophic Risks

arXiv 2206.08966 ↗First posted 17 Jun 2022cs.CY cs.AI cs.LGcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems can provide many beneficial capabilities but also risks of adverse events. Some AI systems could present risks of events with very high or catastrophic consequences at societal scale. The US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has been developing the NIST Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF) as voluntary guidance on AI risk assessment and management for AI developers and others. For addressing risks of events with catastrophic consequences, NIST indicated a need to translate from high level principles to actionable risk management guidance. In this document, we provide detailed actionable-guidance recommendations focused on identifying and managing risks of events with very high or catastrophic consequences, intended as a risk management practices resource for NIST for AI RMF version 1.0 (released in January 2023), or for AI RMF users, or for other AI risk management guidance and standards as appropriate. We also provide our methodology for our recommendations. We provide actionable-guidance recommendations for AI RMF 1.0 on: identifying risks from potential unintended uses and misuses of AI systems; including catastrophic-risk factors within the scope of risk assessments and impact assessments; identifying and mitigating human rights harms; and reporting information on AI risk factors including catastrophic-risk factors. In addition, we provide recommendations on additional issues for a roadmap for later versions of the AI RMF or supplementary publications. These include: providing an AI RMF Profile with supplementary guidance for cutting-edge increasingly multi-purpose or general-purpose AI. We aim for this work to be a concrete risk-management practices contribution, and to stimulate constructive dialogue on how to address catastrophic risks and associated issues in AI standards.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 70 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Jun 2022.

Builds on

13 of 70 references.

References · 13

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,634
  3. 2021WebGPT: Browser-assisted question-answering with human feedbackcited by 1,722
  4. 2022Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCodecited by 1,427
  5. 2021Scaling Language Models: Methods, Analysis & Insights from Training Gophercited by 1,199
  6. 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,068
  7. 2022Red Teaming Language Models with Language Modelscited by 983
  8. 2020Artificial Intelligence, Values and Alignmentcited by 443
  9. 2019Risks from Learned Optimization in Advanced Machine Learning Systemscited by 250
  10. 2018The Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence: Forecasting, Prevention, and Mitigationcited by 159
  11. 2022Structured access: an emerging paradigm for safe AI deploymentcited by 40
  12. 2022Choices, Risks, and Reward Reports: Charting Public Policy for Reinforcement Learning Systemscited by 12
1 more
  1. 2018Analysing Results from AI Benchmarks: Key Indicators and How to Obtain Themcited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 3; 2024: 1; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.

7 papers.