AI-powered
podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
There are differing opinions on the pace and extent of scaling up AI systems. Some argue that with continued scaling, AI systems will become increasingly smarter and more capable, potentially reaching a level comparable to human intelligence. However, others are more skeptical, pointing out that the qualitative extrapolation of AI capabilities is uncertain and that additional engineering and fine-tuning may be required to fully integrate these systems into various tasks and workflows.
There is a high degree of uncertainty regarding the timeline and specifics of AI development. Predictions on when AI will achieve certain milestones, such as building a Dyson sphere or reaching human-level intelligence, vary among experts. Factors such as the pace of algorithmic advances, the need for data and infrastructure, and novel research insights all play a role in shaping the trajectory and rate of progress in AI development.
Analogies to evolution and human learning are frequently employed to understand the development of AI systems. However, these analogies have their limitations. While evolution can be seen as a training run or algorithm designer, it does not directly reflect the scale and complexity of modern AI systems. Similarly, while human learning is superior in certain aspects compared to gradient descent in neural networks, it is constrained by the amount of data a human can access. Understanding these analogies helps provide context but does not provide a definitive forecast for AI development.
Slowing down AI development is seen as beneficial, allowing more time for alignment research, policy discussions, and better preparation for potential risks and challenges associated with AI. This approach is favored over rapid AI progress, as it provides a buffer and allows for the development of better alignment techniques.
Alignment research is considered crucial in ensuring AI systems are aligned with human values and goals. The trade-off lies in the fact that alignment research contributes to AI being more useful and attractive, potentially empowering individuals or governments. However, the overall positive impact of alignment research on reducing the risk of AI takeover outweighs these concerns.
It is important for AI labs to understand the current state of AI capabilities and measure their potential risks. Implementing responsible scaling policies, such as monitoring capabilities, identifying threats, and having a roadmap for taking necessary actions, is key to managing catastrophic risks associated with AI. Several labs have shown interest in adopting these policies to ensure safer and more responsible AI deployment.
The goal is to understand why neural networks exhibit certain behaviors, even for large models with trillions of parameters. By developing explanations that deduce the behavior of the model from its weight values and activations, anomalies and deviations can be detected. This approach aims to have robust explanations that hold true even for new inputs.
Through the development of explanations that capture the reasoning and internal processes of the model, automated interpretability can be achieved. By comparing the behavior of the model on different inputs against the explanations, anomalies can be detected. The explanation should still hold for new inputs under the same distribution, making it possible to identify when deviations occur.
The hope is that explanations can identify scenarios where the model exhibits deceptive or malicious behavior, even during training. By having an explanation that details the conditions under which the model behaves safely or adheres to certain rules, deviations from those conditions can be flagged. This allows for early detection of potential risks and alignment failures, and the necessary actions can be taken to address them.
Producing inputs with specific properties is challenging, as it requires deliberate creation of inputs that have the intended effect in the world. The difference between producing activations with a takeover effect at test time and ones that don't at training time needs to be accounted for.
The project of explaining AI behavior is ambitious and difficult due to the complexity of the desired explanations and the incoherence or interactive difficulty of the desired outcomes. The likelihood of success in creating comprehensive explanations is low, with a projected success rate of 10-20%. The explanation itself would likely be a parameterization mirroring the neural network's parameterization, emphasizing the importance of filling in floating point numbers.
Finding explanations and proving theorems in mathematics share similarities. However, finding explanations in AI systems requires different approaches due to the flexibility and general structure of neural networks. While explanations can be challenging for complex systems, they are often unnecessary for random neural networks with uninteresting behaviors. However, when interesting and coherent behaviors emerge, explanations become more relevant.
Paul Christiano is the world’s leading AI safety researcher. My full episode with him is out!
We discuss:
- Does he regret inventing RLHF, and is alignment necessarily dual-use?
- Why he has relatively modest timelines (40% by 2040, 15% by 2030),
- What do we want post-AGI world to look like (do we want to keep gods enslaved forever)?
- Why he’s leading the push to get to labs develop responsible scaling policies, and what it would take to prevent an AI coup or bioweapon,
- His current research into a new proof system, and how this could solve alignment by explaining model's behavior
- and much more.
Watch on YouTube. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here. Follow me on Twitter for updates on future episodes.
Open Philanthropy
Open Philanthropy is currently hiring for twenty-two different roles to reduce catastrophic risks from fast-moving advances in AI and biotechnology, including grantmaking, research, and operations.
For more information and to apply, please see the application: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/research/new-roles-on-our-gcr-team/
The deadline to apply is November 9th; make sure to check out those roles before they close.
Timestamps
(00:00:00) - What do we want post-AGI world to look like?
(00:24:25) - Timelines
(00:45:28) - Evolution vs gradient descent
(00:54:53) - Misalignment and takeover
(01:17:23) - Is alignment dual-use?
(01:31:38) - Responsible scaling policies
(01:58:25) - Paul’s alignment research
(02:35:01) - Will this revolutionize theoretical CS and math?
(02:46:11) - How Paul invented RLHF
(02:55:10) - Disagreements with Carl Shulman
(03:01:53) - Long TSMC but not NVIDIA
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode
Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways
Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode