MIT AI Risk Repository · Risk Sub-Category · 53.04.04
Erosion of international law and global governance architectures;
Category: Indirect AI contributions to existential risks
Description
-
From Advancing AI Governance: A Literature Review of Problems, Options, and Proposals (Maas2023), as extracted by the MIT AI Risk Repository (CC BY 4.0).
Classification
- Subdomain
- 6.5 Governance failure
- Causal entity
- AI
- Intent
- Unintentional
- Timing
- Post-deployment
Subdomain definition: Inadequate regulatory frameworks and oversight mechanisms failing to keep pace with AI development, leading to ineffective governance and the inability to manage AI risks appropriately.
Real-world incidents in this subdomain
- Nippon Life Alleged ChatGPT Practiced Law Without a License in Illinois Disability Case
- OpenAI Allegedly Did Not Alert RCMP After ChatGPT Flagged Violent Chats Before British Columbia School Shooting
- Remotely Operated Taser-Armed Drones Proposed by Taser Manufacturer as Defense for School Shootings in the US
How other frameworks describe this risk
- Mobility
- Liability issues in case of accidents
- Faster scientific progress makes it harder for governance to keep pace with development
- Type 1: Diffusion of responsibility
- Products Liability Law
- Institutional responsibilities
- Difficult to develop metrics for evaluating benefits or harms caused by AI assistants
- Benchmarking (Cross-lingual data contamination)
Other entries from Maas2023
- Alignment failures in existing ML systems
- Faulty reward functions in the wild
- Specification gaming
- Reward model overoptimization
- Instrumental convergence
- Goal misgeneralization
- Inner misalignment
- Language model misalignment
- Harms from increasingly agentic algorithmic systems
- Dangerous capabilities in AI systems
- Situational awareness
- Acquisition of a goal to harm society