What Information Should Be Shared with Whom "Before and During Training"?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In the Frontier AI Safety Commitments, sixteen companies committed to "Assess the risks posed by their frontier models or systems across the AI lifecycle, including [...] as appropriate, before and during training" (I) and to "Provide public transparency on the implementation of the above (I-VI), except insofar as doing so would increase risk or divulge sensitive commercial information to a degree disproportionate to the societal benefit. They should still share more detailed information which cannot be shared publicly with trusted actors, including their respective home governments or appointed body, as appropriate" (VII). This short paper considers what information should be shared with whom before training begins. What information should be shared publicly and what only with trusted actors such as home governments? Sharing such information before a frontier training run can build shared awareness and preparedness, can improve risk assessment and management, and can contribute to greater predictability and accountability. Companies could share certain information before a training run including: Expected dates of beginning and end of training; Expected compute used (in FLOP); Description of the pre-training dataset(s); Expected capability level of the frontier model or system, including an assessment of potential risks and whether this capability will approach any risk threshold; How the company will monitor progress, capabilities and risks during training; Location, ownership, primary energy source of the large-scale computing cluster(s); Physical, personnel and cybersecurity steps taken; and Which internal and external groups have been tasked to carry out evaluations and red-teaming and what level of resources, support and time they have available to do so.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 17 Dec 2024.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Final Authority in AI Governance: Frontier-Provider Sovereignty and Action-Centered Deployer Governance
- 2026Frontier AI Forecasting Has a Measurement Problem: An Audit of Progress Evidence
- 2026AI Security Priorities: A Field-Wide Agenda
- 2025Towards AI epidemiology: a measurement standardisation framework for prospective risk detection
- 2026Improving Methodologies for Agentic Evaluations Across Domains: Leakage of Sensitive Information, Fraud and Cybersecurity Threats
- 2024Benchmark Early and Red Team Often: A Framework for Assessing and Managing Dual-Use Hazards of AI Foundation Models
- 2026Embedded Assessments for Frontier AI ↗
- 2026Macro-Prudential AI Governance: A Two-Layer Early Warning and Response System for Frontier AI ↗