Confidence-Building Measures for Artificial Intelligence: Workshop Proceedings
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Foundation models could eventually introduce several pathways for undermining state security: accidents, inadvertent escalation, unintentional conflict, the proliferation of weapons, and the interference with human diplomacy are just a few on a long list. The Confidence-Building Measures for Artificial Intelligence workshop hosted by the Geopolitics Team at OpenAI and the Berkeley Risk and Security Lab at the University of California brought together a multistakeholder group to think through the tools and strategies to mitigate the potential risks introduced by foundation models to international security. Originating in the Cold War, confidence-building measures (CBMs) are actions that reduce hostility, prevent conflict escalation, and improve trust between parties. The flexibility of CBMs make them a key instrument for navigating the rapid changes in the foundation model landscape. Participants identified the following CBMs that directly apply to foundation models and which are further explained in this conference proceedings: 1. crisis hotlines 2. incident sharing 3. model, transparency, and system cards 4. content provenance and watermarks 5. collaborative red teaming and table-top exercises and 6. dataset and evaluation sharing. Because most foundation model developers are non-government entities, many CBMs will need to involve a wider stakeholder community. These measures can be implemented either by AI labs or by relevant government actors.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 1 Aug 2023.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 4; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.
9 papers.
- 2024Richelieu: Self-Evolving LLM-Based Agents for AI Diplomacycited by 36
- 2025OpenAI's Approach to External Red Teaming for AI Models and Systemscited by 28
- 2024Exploring ChatGPT and its Impact on Societycited by 6
- 2023Contextual Confidence and Generative AIcited by 1
- 2023AI and Democracy's Digital Identity Crisiscited by 1
- 2024Identifying the Source of Generation for Large Language Modelscited by 1
- 2026What if automating AI R&D triggers an intelligence explosion?cited by 1
- 2024Assistive AI for Augmenting Human Decision-makingcited by 0
- 2025Artificial Intelligence and Nuclear Weapons Proliferation: The Technological Arms Race for (In)visibilitycited by 0
- 2026What if automating AI R&D triggers an intelligence explosion?28 Sep 2026
- 2025Artificial Intelligence and Nuclear Weapons Proliferation: The Technological Arms Race for (In)visibility8 Dec 2025
- 2025OpenAI's Approach to External Red Teaming for AI Models and Systems24 Jan 2025
- 2024Assistive AI for Augmenting Human Decision-making18 Oct 2024
- 2024Richelieu: Self-Evolving LLM-Based Agents for AI Diplomacy9 Jul 2024
- 2024Identifying the Source of Generation for Large Language Models5 Jul 2024
- 2024Exploring ChatGPT and its Impact on Society21 Feb 2024
- 2023Contextual Confidence and Generative AI2 Nov 2023
- 2023AI and Democracy's Digital Identity Crisis25 Sep 2023
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Benchmark Early and Red Team Often: A Framework for Assessing and Managing Dual-Use Hazards of AI Foundation Models
- 2025Verifying International Agreements on AI: Six Layers of Verification for Rules on Large-Scale AI Development and Deployment
- 2026AI Security Priorities: A Field-Wide Agenda
- 2024On Verbalized Confidence Scores for LLMs
- 2025A Different Approach to AI Safety: Proceedings from the Columbia Convening on Openness in Artificial Intelligence and AI Safety
- 2026Tipping Points in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems: Stance on Climate Change Action
- 2025Victor Calibration (VC): Multi-Pass Confidence Calibration and CP4.3 Governance Stress Test under Round-Table Orchestration
- 2025Safety by Measurement: A Systematic Literature Review of AI Safety Evaluation Methods