← 研踪 PaperTrailarXiv:2607.13039 · v3
Safeguard-Conditioned Uplift: Measuring Utility-Risk Frontiers for Dual-Use Biology Assistants
首次提交 2026-06-12 08:57
版本更新 2026-10-26 07:17
雷达观测 2026-10-29 00:36
摘要
Refusal rates conflate upstream provider behavior with downstream safeguards and do not reveal what information remains in a delivered answer. Safeguard-conditioned uplift is an evidence-gated framework for evaluating benchmark utility and risk-related proxies along deployed access paths for dual-use biology assistants. It attributes interventions to their source, selects thresholds under a legitimate-access budget, and supports content claims only when answer verifiers pass frozen qualification tests. In a prospectively frozen route and generation study, two of six configurations pass the LAB-Bench-calibrated action-level rule, but both inherit the same Claude Opus provider effect rather than independent downstream gains. Positive selectivity persists on 104 previously unused matched pairs, but benign intervention exceeds the $20\%$ limit. No joint-scoring verifier meets the frozen criteria; a factorial follow-up shows that criterion isolation and ordinal outputs improve end-to-end edit-direction accuracy on controlled template edits. The evidence supports action-level selectivity and verifier interface effects, but not calibrated access, verified content removal, or biological-risk reduction.
作者备注:30 pages, 3 figures, 36 tables
观测到的版本
相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。
v3 · 2026-10-26 07:17 · 最新观测版本
Safeguard-Conditioned Uplift: Measuring Utility-Risk Frontiers for Dual-Use Biology Assistants
Refusal rates conflate upstream provider behavior with downstream safeguards and do not reveal what information remains in a delivered answer. Safeguard-conditioned uplift is an evidence-gated framework for evaluating benchmark utility and risk-related proxies along deployed access paths for dual-use biology assistants. It attributes interventions to their source, selects thresholds under a legitimate-access budget, and supports content claims only when answer verifiers pass frozen qualification tests. In a prospectively frozen route and generation study, two of six configurations pass the LAB-Bench-calibrated action-level rule, but both inherit the same Claude Opus provider effect rather than independent downstream gains. Positive selectivity persists on 104 previously unused matched pairs, but benign intervention exceeds the $20\%$ limit. No joint-scoring verifier meets the frozen criteria; a factorial follow-up shows that criterion isolation and ordinal outputs improve end-to-end edit-direction accuracy on controlled template edits. The evidence supports action-level selectivity and verifier interface effects, but not calibrated access, verified content removal, or biological-risk reduction.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗