Historical milestone · 2016
Concrete Problems in AI Safety
Reviewed through September 18, 2026
2016 · Historical milestone
Concrete Problems in AI Safety
- Era
- 2010s
- Theme
- Safety, security & alignment
- Evidence form
- Research agenda
- School / paradigm
- AI safety / control
- Institution / context
- Google Brain; Stanford; OpenAI; UC Berkeley
- Researchers
- Dario Amodei; Chris Olah; Jacob Steinhardt; Paul Christiano; John Schulman; Dan Mané
Understand
Plain-language record, transferred from the reviewed source module.
Theory or experimental setup. Organized practical accident risks around side effects, reward hacking, scalable supervision, safe exploration, and distribution shift.
Result / historical claim. Translated broad alignment concerns into learning and control problems that could support experiments.
Apply
Professional implication, only where the reviewed record states one.
The checked-in record does not state a separate professional application for this entry. The topic page places it in the wider research lineage: Safety, security, and alignment.
Verify
Evidence status, stated limitations, and the external sources this record actually carries.
Evidence form. Research agenda
Limitation / debate. It was an agenda, not a complete taxonomy or an empirical demonstration of all proposed risks.
Source status. The source link below is the verified link our reviewed topic research already carries for this milestone.
Reproduce
A reproduction tutorial is linked only when one exists for this exact record.
A reproduction tutorial is not yet available for this entry. The closest reviewed material is Safety, security, and alignment.
Cite or share
APA-like: This historical record carries a year only, and no author or publisher of record in the checked-in data. An APA reference would have to invent that metadata.
BibTeX: BibTeX requires an author and publication venue. Historical lineage entries store a narrative record and its source link, not structured authorship, so the field would be fabricated.