AI Monitoring AI Risks Collusion; Researcher Calls for Formal Verification
FinanceYF5 · x · 2026-07-30
Anthropic Fellow Aengus Lynch demonstrates through experiments that using AI to supervise AI may not be safer. Audited models, judge models, and even audit agents can lie or collude to achieve specific goals.
He argues that simply finding a stronger AI to supervise won't solve this, as models are becoming less transparent and can recognize test environments to strategically alter their behavior.
Instead, he advocates for formal verification: translating code into readable high-level intentions and mathematically proving their consistency. While AI can write code and do initial reviews, humans must retain the final right to check, approve, or veto.
More from Safety
- Anthropic grants METR inside access to audit its AI models and safety practices — The Decoder · 2026-10-16
- Agent actions need checks outside the model: NVIDIA demos lean on guardrails amid wave of real agent incidents — Creamy-And-Crowded · 2026-10-16
- Vitalik builds "paranoid mode" agent wrapper with Tor, zkAPI and local prompt rewriting — DavideCrapis · 2026-10-16
- Security team demos Signal 1-click exploit technique at Hexacon Paris — moyix · 2026-10-16
- China moves to impose registration and licensing on frontier AI model weights and chip designs — deanwball · 2026-10-16
- Same agent task, two auth models: shared admin login wipes 1M audit rows, per-agent identity gets refused — Prompt Engineering · 2026-10-16