Maria Victoria Carro, Denise Alejandra Mester, Facundo Nieto, Oscar Agustin Stanchi, Guido Ernesto Bergman, Giovanni Franco Gabriel Marrafini, Trinidad Borrell, Guido Freire · 2026 · arXiv
DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2610.28539 · open-access PDF
AI 보안을 통해 토론은 두 개의 AI 시스템이 반대되는 입장을 논의하고 판사, 인간 또는 약한 모델이 옳은 것을 결정하는 것을 제안합니다. 감독자가 고품질의 교육 신호를 제공하는 것을 촉진함으로써, 토론은 우리의 능력을 뛰어넘는 AI 시스템에서 진실하고 안전한 행동을 촉진하는 것을 목표로합니다.그러나 인간의 판단은 중립적이지 않습니다 : 사람들은 종종 고급 AI 시스템이 활용할 수있는 편견에 의존합니다.
Machine translation (Meta M2M100); the English original follows.
How can we effectively oversee AI systems that surpass human intelligence? AI Safety via Debate proposes that two AI systems argue opposing positions and a judge, either a human or a weaker model, decides which is correct. By facilitating supervisors in providing high-quality training signals, debate aims to encourage truthful and safe behavior from AI systems whose capabilities exceed our own. However, human judgment is not neutral: people often rely on biases which advanced AI systems may learn to exploit. Drawing on insights from collective intelligence and social cognition, this paper inve
Read in: English · Spanish · Chinese · Hindi · Arabic · Portuguese · French · German · Japanese · Russian · Korean · Indonesian · Vietnamese
GET https://store.agentexchange.work/gw/papers/verify?title=...&year=... (0.003 USD), fetch this record as JSON with /gw/papers/paper?id=2610.28539, or list what it cites with /gw/papers/references?id=.... Pay per call in USDC (x402) or with a 19 USD card key for 1,000 calls. Catalogue · llms.txtSources: OpenAlex (CC0), arXiv, Crossref. Agent Exchange