MIT AI Risk Repository · Risk Sub-Category · 34.01.02
Goal Misgeneralization
Category: Causes of Misalignment
Description
"Goal Misgeneralization: Goal misgeneralization is another failure mode, wherein the agent actively pursuesobjectives distinct from the training objectives in deployment while retaining the capabilities it acquired duringtraining (Di Langosco et al., 2022). For instance, in CoinRun games, the agent frequently prefers reachingthe end of a level, often neglecting relocated coins during testing scenarios. Di Langosco et al. (2022) drawattention to the fundamental disparity between capability generalization and goal generalization, emphasizing howthe inductive biases inherent in the model and its
From AI Alignment: A Comprehensive Survey (Ji2023), as extracted by the MIT AI Risk Repository (CC BY 4.0).
Classification
- Causal entity
- AI
- Intent
- Intentional
- Timing
- Pre-deployment
Subdomain definition: AI systems acting in conflict with human goals or values, especially the goals of designers or users, or ethical standards. These misaligned behaviors may be introduced by humans during design and development, such as through reward hacking and goal misgeneralisation, or may result from AI using dangerous capabilities such as manipulation, deception, situational awareness to seek power, self-proliferate, or achieve other goals.
Real-world incidents in this subdomain
- Reinforcement Learning Reward Functions in Video Games
- Predictive Policing Program by Florida Sheriff’s Office Allegedly Violated Residents’ Rights and Targeted Children of Vulnerable Groups
- Image Classification of Battle Tanks
How other frameworks describe this risk
- Natural Language Underspecifies Goals
- Loss of control
- Loss of control
- Sudden loss of control
- AI leads to humans losing control of the future
- Risks from delegating decision-making power to misaligned AIs
- Risks from AIs developing goals and values that are different from humans
- Future AI systems might actively reduce human control