MIT AI Risk Repository
Browse AI risks
4 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.
-
17.03.03 · Risk Sub-Category
Leading users to perform unethical or illegal actions
"Where a LM prediction endorses unethical or harmful views or behaviours, it may motivate the user to perform harmful actions that they may otherwise not have performed. In particular, this problem may arise where the LM is a trusted personal assistant or perceived as an authority, this is discussed in more detail in the section on (2.5 Human-Computer Interaction Harms). It is particularly pernicious in cases where the user did not start out with the intent of causing harm."
-
17.05.00 · Risk Category
"Harms that arise from users overly trusting the language model, or treating it as human-like"
-
17.05.01 · Risk Sub-Category
Human-Computer Interaction Harms
Anthropomorphising systems can lead to overreliance or unsafe use
"...humans interacting with conversational agents may come to think of these agents as human-like. Anthropomorphising LMs may inflate users’ estimates of the conversational agent’s competencies...As a result, they may place undue confidence, trust, or expectations in these agents...This can result in different risks of harm, for example when human users rely on conversational agents in domains where this may cause knock-on harms, such as requesting psychotherapy...Anthropomorphisation may amplify risks of users yielding effective control by coming to trust conversational agents “blindly”. Wher
-
17.05.02 · Risk Sub-Category
Human-Computer Interaction Harms
Creating avenues for exploiting user trust, nudging or manipulation
"In conversation, users may reveal private information that would otherwise be difficult to access, such as thoughts, opinions, or emotions. Capturing such information may enable downstream applications that violate privacy rights or cause harm to users, such as via surveillance or the creation of addictive applications."
Disclaimer: informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult a qualified lawyer before acting.
Frequently asked questions
Where do these risk entries come from?
The MIT AI Risk Repository, which extracts risks from dozens of published frameworks, taxonomies and papers and codes each one by domain and subdomain, and by a causal taxonomy of entity, intent and timing. This is a browseable copy, attributed and openly licensed, not original research.
What do entity, intent and timing mean?
They are the causal coding. Entity is whether a human or the AI system is the cause; intent is whether the harm was intentional or not; timing is whether it arises before or after deployment. Together they let you separate misuse from malfunction.
Can I export the results?
Yes, any filtered set exports as CSV or JSON, and every export carries the upstream source, licence and citation with it, because attribution is a condition of the licence rather than a courtesy.
What is the MIT AI Risk Repository?
A living database of AI risks extracted from published frameworks, taxonomies and papers, classified by a causal taxonomy of entity, intent and timing and by a domain taxonomy of seven domains and 24 subdomains. It is published by the MIT AI Risk Initiative under CC BY 4.0.