AI Red Team Engineering notes, research references, and field notes on AI systems, responsible AI, governance, and compliance.
Global search

Search AI Red Team

Search across the complete knowledge base.

Enter at least two characters to begin.
↑↓ select Enter open Browse the full research archive
METR · February 27, 2025

GPT-4.5’s short evaluation illustrates the limits of release-time safety checks

analysis Model EvaluationAI Compliance
Why it matters

METR’s February 2025 assessment had about a week of access to an earlier GPT-4.5 checkpoint and used a scaffold optimized for another model. It combined task results with some developer-provided evidence, but explicitly declined to treat those results as ruling out major risks. Limited elicitation, possible gains from later modifications and internal use before release all constrain a predeployment snapshot. The report proposes earlier third-party involvement in evaluation design and review of internal results. Its tentative historical judgment is not a current safety certification for GPT-4.5 or later systems.

My takeaway: Arrange independent review during development, with agreed elicitation plans and access to relevant internal evidence. Track checkpoint and scaffold differences and revisit conclusions after material capability or deployment changes.
Keep exploring

More curated notes connected through Model Evaluation and AI Compliance.

OpenAI News · framework

Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities

OpenAI says preliminary evidence that Astra may meet its Critical cybersecurity threshold led it to pause frontier reinforcement-learning work for two weeks and keep its largest planned run on hold. New safeguards include stronger workload and network isolation, continuous boundary testing, token-level monitoring that escalates suspicious tool activity, and broader alignment checks for deception, reward hacking, and unauthorized access.

OpenAI News · framework

A blueprint for democratic governance of frontier AI

OpenAI proposes a three-part U.S. frontier-AI governance model: harmonize emerging state safety laws into a federal baseline, strengthen CAISI as an evaluation and standards institution, and coordinate a broader resilience program. Proposed controls include severe-risk evaluations, transparency reports, independent audits, safety-incident reporting, model-weight security, whistleblower protection, and periodic technical assessments.

OpenAI News · framework

OpenAI’s Frontier Governance Framework

OpenAI's 22-page Frontier Governance Framework maps its frontier-model processes to California's Transparency in Frontier AI Act and the EU AI Act's general-purpose AI code. It documents lifecycle risk assessment, cyber-offense and other risk tiers, mitigation and residual-risk decisions, critical-incident handling, security risk management, model reporting, external review, responsibility allocation, and change control.