Wilber Sean Anterola, Matthew Ball, Luis F. Lafuerza +1 more
Frontier AI companies publish capability thresholds, the levels at which they say a model becomes dangerous enough to require specific safeguards. The thresholds differ substantially between companies, which creates two problems.
The first is verification. An outside party trying to determine whether a threshold has been crossed has no common yardstick, and cannot compare one company's commitments against another's. The second is the incentive structure that follows: with no shared minimum, whoever sets the loosest threshold faces the fewest obligations, which is the race to the bottom the authors name.
That second point is why this is a coordination problem rather than a technical one. No individual company can fix it by tightening its own threshold, since that only widens the gap with competitors, which is precisely the situation where a harmonisation methodology has something to offer.
Frontier AI companies have published capability thresholds that differ substantially, making it difficult for third parties to verify whether a threshold has been crossed or to compare requirements across companies. Moreover, without common minimum thresholds, risk mitigation may be inconsistent, creating a potential race to the bottom in safety standards. We develop a methodology for deriving harmonized thresholds across three risk domains. For misuse risks (cyber and…
CRISP: Constrained Refinement via Iterative Squeezing Process for Robust Medical Image Segmentation under Domain Shift
arXiv (cs.LG) · July 16, 2026Data Driven Block Replacement Scheduling
arXiv (cs.CV) · July 16, 2026Divergent Gaze Patterns in Artistic Viewing: Spatial and Temporal Signatures of Attention Across Autistic Individuals, Artists, and Neurotypical Observers
arXiv (cs.CV) · July 16, 2026Structural-Semantic Reciprocal Learning for Unsupervised Visible-Infrared Person Re-Identification