MIT AI Risk Repository

Browse AI risks

2,500 risk entries extracted from 74 frameworks, coded by domain, subdomain, causal entity, intent and timing. Filter, then export the current selection with its licence and citation attached.

Reset Also filtered by framework G'sell2025 ×

2,500 entries · page 50 of 50

  1. 70.03.03a · Additional evidence

    Economic Risks

    Power concentration

  2. 70.04.00 · Risk Category

    Social Risks

  3. 70.04.01a · Additional evidence

    Social Risks

    Bias and discrimination

  4. 70.04.02a · Additional evidence

    Social Risks

    Lack of accountability and liability

  5. 70.04.05a · Additional evidence

    Social Risks

    Transformative effects

  6. 71.01.01a · Additional evidence

    Scientific Domain of Agents

    Chemical Risks

  7. 71.01.02a · Additional evidence

    Scientific Domain of Agents

    Biological Risks

  8. 71.01.03a · Additional evidence

    Scientific Domain of Agents

    Radiological Risks

  9. 71.01.04a · Additional evidence

    Scientific Domain of Agents

    Physical (Mechanical ) Risks

  10. 71.01.05a · Additional evidence

    Scientific Domain of Agents

    Information Science Risks

  11. 71.01.06 · Risk Sub-Category

    Scientific Domain of Agents

    Emerging Tech

    "Uncontrolled AI self- improvement; Quantum security"

    From Risks of AI Scientists: Prioritizing Safeguarding Over Autonomy (Tang2025)

  12. 71.02.00 · Risk Category

    User Intent

    "Whether the risk originates from malicious intent or is an unintended consequence of legitimate task objectives"

    From Risks of AI Scientists: Prioritizing Safeguarding Over Autonomy (Tang2025)

  13. 71.02.03 · Risk Sub-Category

    User Intent

    Unintended Consequences

    "Unpredictable and unforeseen outcomes from purposeful actions"

    From Risks of AI Scientists: Prioritizing Safeguarding Over Autonomy (Tang2025)

  14. 71.02.03a · Additional evidence

    User Intent

    Unintended Consequences

  15. 71.03.00 · Risk Category

    Environment

  16. 71.03.01a · Additional evidence

    Environment

    Nature

  17. 71.03.02 · Risk Sub-Category

    Environment

    Human Health

    "Damage to individual well-being or public health"

    From Risks of AI Scientists: Prioritizing Safeguarding Over Autonomy (Tang2025)

  18. 71.03.02a · Additional evidence

    Environment

    Human Health

  19. 71.03.03 · Risk Sub-Category

    Environment

    Socioeconomics

    "Dramatically change the social and economic status"

    From Risks of AI Scientists: Prioritizing Safeguarding Over Autonomy (Tang2025)

  20. 71.03.03a · Additional evidence

    Environment

    Socioeconomics

  21. 72.01.00a · Additional evidence

    Misuse Risks

  22. 72.01.02a · Additional evidence

    Misuse Risks

    Biological and Chemical Risks

  23. 72.01.03a · Additional evidence

    Misuse Risks

    Physical Harm and Injury Risks

  24. 72.01.04a · Additional evidence

    Misuse Risks

    Large-Scale Persuasion and Harmful Manipulation Risks

  25. 72.02.00a · Additional evidence

    Loss of Control Risks

  26. 72.02.02a · Additional evidence

    Loss of Control Risks

    Active loss of control

  27. 72.02.02b · Additional evidence

    Loss of Control Risks

    Active loss of control

  28. 72.03.00a · Additional evidence

    Accident Risks

  29. 72.03.00b · Additional evidence

    Accident Risks

  30. 72.04.00 · Risk Category

    Systemic Risks

    "Systemic risks emerge from widespread deployment of general-purpose AI beyond the risks directly posed by capabilities of individual models. These risks arise from structural mismatches between AI technology and existing social, economic, and institutional frameworks, creating vulnerabilities that transcend individual model-level interventions and require coordinated industry-wide and societal-level responses."

    From Frontier AI Risk Management Framework (v1.0) (Tse2025)

  31. 72.04.00a · Additional evidence

    Systemic Risks

  32. 72.06.00 · Risk Category

    Model Propensities

  33. 73.03.05a · Additional evidence

    Dual-Use Capabilities Enable Malicious Use and Misuse of LLMs

    Hazardous Biological and Chemical Technologies

  34. "A key desideratum for an LLM from a user’s perspective is ‘trustworthiness’, i.e. assurance of reliability and consistent performance, and absence of any accidental harm caused by the technology to the user.16 Providing assurance that an LLM-based system will not cause accidental harm remains a major open challenge. Harms may either occur directly due to the flawed nature of LLMs, e.g. an LLM generating toxic language or behaving inappropriately in some other ways, or may occur due to improper usage by a user, e.g. automation bias due to a user’s overreliance on LLM."

    From Foundational Challenges in Assuring Alignment and Safety of Large Language Models (Anwar2024)

  35. 73.04.01a · Additional evidence

    LLM-Systems Can Be Untrustworthy

    Harms of Representation and Other Biases

  36. 73.04.02a · Additional evidence

    LLM-Systems Can Be Untrustworthy

    Inconsistent Performance across and within Domains

  37. 73.04.03a · Additional evidence

    LLM-Systems Can Be Untrustworthy

    Overreliance

  38. "The rapid evolution of LLMs brings significant socioeconomic opportunities and challenges, impacting the workforce, income inequality, education, and global economic development. Many of these challenges are systemic in nature, constituting what economists refer to as general equilibrium effects. These challenges do not arise directly from LLMs causing harm to users but rather from their indirect effects on the socioeconomic equilibrium."

    From Foundational Challenges in Assuring Alignment and Safety of Large Language Models (Anwar2024)

  39. 73.05.01a · Additional evidence

    Socioeconomic Impacts of LLM May Be Highly Disruptive

    Effects on the Workforce

  40. 73.05.01b · Additional evidence

    Socioeconomic Impacts of LLM May Be Highly Disruptive

    Effects on the Workforce

  41. 73.05.03a · Additional evidence

    Socioeconomic Impacts of LLM May Be Highly Disruptive

    Global Economic Development

  42. 73.07.03 · Risk Sub-Category

    Jailbreaks and Prompt Injections Threaten Security of LLMs

    Adversarial Optimization:

    "Jailbreak attacks can be discovered by performing manual or auto- mated adversarial optimization against a proxy objective that is noisily correlated with the success of a jailbreak. These are mostly gradient-based attacks (Zou et al., 2023b; Shin et al., 2020) as described in the previous two challenges, but gradient-free methods also exist (Prasad et al., 2022; Deng et al., 2022; Lapid et al., 2023)."

    From Foundational Challenges in Assuring Alignment and Safety of Large Language Models (Anwar2024)

  43. 74.01.06a · Additional evidence

    Inherent Risk

    Hallucination

  44. 74.01.07a · Additional evidence

    Inherent Risk

    Value-related risks in LLMs

  45. 74.02.01a · Additional evidence

    Malicious Use

    Toxicity in LLM Malicious Use

Informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult qualified counsel before acting.