📜

Eliciting Latent Knowledge Via Hypothetical Sensors

📅 2021
policy development
⚪ Common
#ai #eliciting latent knowledge (elk)

📖 Description

This is a response to [ARC's first technical report: Eliciting Latent Knowledge](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/qHCDysDnvhteW7kRd/arc-s-first-technical-report-eliciting-latent-knowledge). But it should be fairly understandable even if you didn't read ARC's report, since I summarize relevant parts of their report as necessary. Here I propose some approaches to the problem ARC outlines which are very different from the approaches they explore.

📊 Game Impacts

Variable Change Condition
Research +5 Always
Vibey Doom +2 Always
Ethics Risk -5 Always

💭 Reactions

🔬 Safety Researcher Reaction: ⚠️ Placeholder - Needs Real Quote
"Adds to our knowledge base"
📰 Media Reaction: ⚠️ Placeholder - Needs Real Quote
"Discussed in AI safety community"
💡 Found a Real Quote? Suggest it here

🔗 Sources

🏷️ Event Metadata

Think this event's metadata could be improved? Suggest changes to category, rarity, tags, game impacts, or p(doom) effects.

📁 Category Policy Development → Suggest different category
⭐ Rarity ⚪ Common → Suggest different rarity
🏷️ Tags (2) ai, eliciting latent knowledge (elk) → Suggest tag changes
📊 Game Impacts (3) 3 variable changes → Suggest impact changes
☢️ p(Doom) Impact No direct impact → Suggest p(doom) change
📝 General Metadata Year, description, reactions → Comprehensive review

🤝 Found an Issue?

This event data is sourced from the pdoom-data repository. If you notice errors or want to suggest improvements:

GitHub Issue (Preferred) 📧 Email (No GitHub)
← Back to All Events