arXiv subjects

Everett Smith

Publications and source records attributed to Everett Smith.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

AI Security Priorities: A Field-Wide Agenda

As AI systems are rapidly integrated into critical economic, governmental, and national security functions, the gap between AI adoption and AI security readiness continues to widen. This paper presents a prioritized agenda for advancing AI security, informed by structured interviews with leaders across industry, government, and civil society, and refined through a multi-sector expert workshop. Participants identified and ranked the highest-importance and most cost-effective areas where progress could strengthen AI security - from protecting frontier AI systems and their underlying infrastructure to improving cybersecurity practices as AI reshapes the threat landscape. The resulting priorities are organized across four themes: establishing strategic foundations and policy frameworks; advancing public-private coordination and institutional infrastructure; advancing technical security engineering and assurance; and governing agentic AI under adversarial pressure. For each priority area, expert authors provide detailed analyses that define the problem, assess the current landscape, and identify actionable projects that stakeholders across sectors can pursue. The paper aims to serve as an initial practical foundation for coordinated investment and action across the AI security field. It is designed to serve both current practitioners and individuals and organizations looking to enter the field by identifying concrete, high-impact contributions suited to a range of strengths and capacities.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

GPAI Evaluations Standards Taskforce: Towards Effective AI Governance

General-purpose AI evaluations have been proposed as a promising way of identifying and mitigating systemic risks posed by AI development and deployment. While GPAI evaluations play an increasingly central role in institutional decision- and policy-making -- including by way of the European Union AI Act's mandate to conduct evaluations on GPAI models presenting systemic risk -- no standards exist to date to promote their quality or legitimacy. To strengthen GPAI evaluations in the EU, which currently constitutes the first and only jurisdiction that mandates GPAI evaluations, we outline four desiderata for GPAI evaluations: internal validity, external validity, reproducibility, and portability. To uphold these desiderata in a dynamic environment of continuously evolving risks, we propose a dedicated EU GPAI Evaluation Standards Taskforce, to be housed within the bodies established by the EU AI Act. We outline the responsibilities of the Taskforce, specify the GPAI provider commitments that would facilitate Taskforce success, discuss the potential impact of the Taskforce on global AI governance, and address potential sources of failure that policymakers should heed.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

AI Emergency Preparedness: Examining the federal government's ability to detect and respond to AI-related national security threats

We examine how the federal government can enhance its AI emergency preparedness: the ability to detect and prepare for time-sensitive national security threats relating to AI. Emergency preparedness can improve the government's ability to monitor and predict AI progress, identify national security threats, and prepare effective response plans for plausible threats and worst-case scenarios. Our approach draws from fields in which experts prepare for threats despite uncertainty about their exact nature or timing (e.g., counterterrorism, cybersecurity, pandemic preparedness). We focus on three plausible risk scenarios: (1) loss of control (threats from a powerful AI system that becomes capable of escaping human control), (2) cybersecurity threats from malicious actors (threats from a foreign actor that steals the model weights of a powerful AI system), and (3) biological weapons proliferation (threats from users identifying a way to circumvent the safeguards of a publicly-released model in order to develop biological weapons.) We evaluate the federal government's ability to detect, prevent, and respond to these threats. Then, we highlight potential gaps and offer recommendations to improve emergency preparedness. We conclude by describing how future work on AI emergency preparedness can be applied to improve policymakers' understanding of risk scenarios, identify gaps in detection capabilities, and form preparedness plans to improve the effectiveness of federal responses to AI-related national security threats.

cs.CY↗