Research / Sources
Research on governing advanced AI and its risks. www.governance.ai
Argues the UK should regulate frontier AI development with a flexible principles-based regulator, plus defenses against biological design tool risks, misinformation, and updated legal frameworks.
Proposes a framework for deciding which AI governance issues need international coordination, finding strong benefits for compute oversight, model evaluations, incident monitoring and risk management, and weaker benefits for data privacy and bias.
A GovAI white paper on how Global AI Majority countries can gain voice in and access to AI, weighing dual-use security concerns with proposals for interest alignment and safety assurance.
Proposes an International AI Organization that certifies state jurisdictions for compliance with oversight standards, enforced through import and export controls on AI-embedded goods and hardware, to mitigate advanced AI harms.
A GovAI case study drawing lessons from atomic bomb development for governing transformative technologies safely, framed as a reference for future AI-era strategic risks.
A strategic model of AI-style technology races finds that laggards may cut corners on risky deployment when adversarial, and that safety improvements can be offset by risk compensation.
Analyses whether the EU AI Act will spread globally through de facto and de jure Brussels Effect mechanisms, especially for high-risk AI systems, and argues it will shape what trustworthy AI means in practice.
GovAI's policy response to the UK Future of Compute Review argues for structured access to high-compute AI models, tiered compute access with review, and research access for outside scrutiny to prevent misuse.
A game-theoretic model of AI development races shows how decisiveness and information disclosure affect disaster risk, with public capability information sometimes improving welfare.
Argues that lethal autonomous weapons should be regulated through an international nonproliferation regime with safety provisions, export and software controls, and criminal penalties, possibly combined with a prohibition.
A GovAI post by Dafoe and Carlier arguing that AI governance work should prepare durable institutions, noting several notable institutions emerged in 2020.
A survey of 524 ML researchers finds strong support for prioritizing AI safety research and pre-publication harm review, with low trust in military and some companies, and strong opposition to lethal autonomous weapons.
A GovAI review of the U.S. government's legal policy levers, such as export controls, R&D spending and secrecy orders, for shaping AI research and deployment for national security.
Historical analysis of the 1944-1951 Baruch Plan debates on international control of nuclear technology, drawing lessons for governing existentially dangerous technologies such as AI.
GovAI's consultation response to the European Commission's AI White Paper argues that a trust ecosystem and proportionate regulation can mitigate AI accident and misuse risks while supporting innovation.
Draws on the history of international regimes to weigh the trade-offs of centralising AI governance, concluding that design details matter and fragmentation will likely persist for now.
Argues that international standards bodies are an important, underused policy tool for coordinating beneficial AI research and development, and recommends engagement for researchers and AI organisations.
Argues that framing US-China AI development as an arms race encourages zero-sum thinking, and examines how that framing distorts policy choices on AI competition and risk.
Allan Dafoe's GovAI research agenda sets out a framework for AI governance research, framing the overall problem and listing pivotal open questions with references.
A GovAI syllabus for self-study on the intersection of AI and international security, covering military AI, arms races and related governance risks.