Roman V. Yampolskiy

AI
h-index34
32papers
1,485citations
Novelty21%
AI Score32

32 Papers

6.6CYFeb 16, 2023
AI Risk Skepticism, A Comprehensive Survey

Vemir Michael Ambartsoumean, Roman V. Yampolskiy

In this thorough study, we took a closer look at the skepticism that has arisen with respect to potential dangers associated with artificial intelligence, denoted as AI Risk Skepticism. Our study takes into account different points of view on the topic and draws parallels with other forms of skepticism that have shown up in science. We categorize the various skepticisms regarding the dangers of AI by the type of mistaken thinking involved. We hope this will be of interest and value to AI researchers concerned about the future of AI and the risks that it may pose. The issues of skepticism and risk in AI are decidedly important and require serious consideration. By addressing these issues with the rigor and precision of scientific research, we hope to better understand the objections we face and to find satisfactory ways to resolve them.

3.3AIOct 17, 2025
The Right to Be Remembered: Preserving Maximally Truthful Digital Memory in the Age of AI

Alex Zhavoronkov, Dominika Wilczok, Roman Yampolskiy

Since the rapid expansion of large language models (LLMs), people have begun to rely on them for information retrieval. While traditional search engines display ranked lists of sources shaped by search engine optimization (SEO), advertising, and personalization, LLMs typically provide a synthesized response that feels singular and authoritative. While both approaches carry risks of bias and omission, LLMs may amplify the effect by collapsing multiple perspectives into one answer, reducing users ability or inclination to compare alternatives. This concentrates power over information in a few LLM vendors whose systems effectively shape what is remembered and what is overlooked. As a result, certain narratives, individuals or groups, may be disproportionately suppressed, while others are disproportionately elevated. Over time, this creates a new threat: the gradual erasure of those with limited digital presence, and the amplification of those already prominent, reshaping collective memory. To address these concerns, this paper presents a concept of the Right To Be Remembered (RTBR) which encompasses minimizing the risk of AI-driven information omission, embracing the right of fair treatment, while ensuring that the generated content would be maximally truthful.

16.0AISep 1, 2021
Impossibility Results in AI: A Survey

Mario Brcic, Roman V. Yampolskiy

An impossibility theorem demonstrates that a particular problem or set of problems cannot be solved as described in the claim. Such theorems put limits on what is possible to do concerning artificial intelligence, especially the super-intelligent one. As such, these results serve as guidelines, reminders, and warnings to AI safety, AI policy, and governance researchers. These might enable solutions to some long-standing questions in the form of formalizing theories in the framework of constraint satisfaction without committing to one option. We strongly believe this to be the most prudent approach to long-term AI safety initiatives. In this paper, we have categorized impossibility theorems applicable to AI into five mechanism-based categories: deduction, indistinguishability, induction, tradeoffs, and intractability. We found that certain theorems are too specific or have implicit assumptions that limit application. Also, we added new results (theorems) such as the unfairness of explainability, the first explainability-related result in the induction category. The remaining results deal with misalignment between the clones and put a limit to the self-awareness of agents. We concluded that deductive impossibilities deny 100%-guarantees for security. In the end, we give some ideas that hold potential in explainability, controllability, value alignment, ethics, and group decision-making. They can be deepened by further investigation.

3.0NEJul 15, 2021
Death in Genetic Algorithms

Micah Burkhardt, Roman V. Yampolskiy

Death has long been overlooked in evolutionary algorithms. Recent research has shown that death (when applied properly) can benefit the overall fitness of a population and can outperform sub-sections of a population that are "immortal" when allowed to evolve together in an environment [1]. In this paper, we strive to experimentally determine whether death is an adapted trait and whether this adaptation can be used to enhance our implementations of conventional genetic algorithms. Using some of the most widely accepted evolutionary death and aging theories, we observed that senescent death (in various forms) can lower the total run-time of genetic algorithms, increase the optimality of a solution, and decrease the variance in an algorithm's performance. We believe that death-enhanced genetic algorithms can accomplish this through their unique ability to backtrack out of and/or avoid getting trapped in local optima altogether.

6.1AIMay 2, 2021
AI Risk Skepticism

Roman V. Yampolskiy

In this work, we survey skepticism regarding AI risk and show parallels with other types of scientific skepticism. We start by classifying different types of AI Risk skepticism and analyze their root causes. We conclude by suggesting some intervention approaches, which may be successful in reducing AI risk skepticism, at least amongst artificial intelligence researchers.

6.6CYApr 22, 2021
Understanding and Avoiding AI Failures: A Practical Guide

Heather M. Williams, Roman V. Yampolskiy

As AI technologies increase in capability and ubiquity, AI accidents are becoming more common. Based on normal accident theory, high reliability theory, and open systems theory, we create a framework for understanding the risks associated with AI applications. In addition, we also use AI safety principles to quantify the unique risks of increased intelligence and human-like qualities in AI. Together, these two fields give a more complete picture of the risks of contemporary AI. By focusing on system properties near accidents instead of seeking a root cause of accidents, we identify where attention should be paid to safety for current generation AI systems.

3.3CYNov 26, 2020
Transdisciplinary AI Observatory -- Retrospective Analyses and Future-Oriented Contradistinctions

Nadisha-Marie Aliman, Leon Kester, Roman Yampolskiy

In the last years, AI safety gained international recognition in the light of heterogeneous safety-critical and ethical issues that risk overshadowing the broad beneficial impacts of AI. In this context, the implementation of AI observatory endeavors represents one key research direction. This paper motivates the need for an inherently transdisciplinary AI observatory approach integrating diverse retrospective and counterfactual views. We delineate aims and limitations while providing hands-on-advice utilizing concrete practical examples. Distinguishing between unintentionally and intentionally triggered AI risks with diverse socio-psycho-technological impacts, we exemplify a retrospective descriptive analysis followed by a retrospective counterfactual risk analysis. Building on these AI observatory tools, we present near-term transdisciplinary guidelines for AI safety. As further contribution, we discuss differentiated and tailored long-term directions through the lens of two disparate modern AI safety paradigms. For simplicity, we refer to these two different paradigms with the terms artificial stupidity (AS) and eternal creativity (EC) respectively. While both AS and EC acknowledge the need for a hybrid cognitive-affective approach to AI safety and overlap with regard to many short-term considerations, they differ fundamentally in the nature of multiple envisaged long-term solution patterns. By compiling relevant underlying contradistinctions, we aim to provide future-oriented incentives for constructive dialectics in practical and theoretical AI safety research.

2.3AIOct 6, 2020
Chess as a Testing Grounds for the Oracle Approach to AI Safety

James D. Miller, Roman Yampolskiy, Olle Haggstrom et al.

To reduce the danger of powerful super-intelligent AIs, we might make the first such AIs oracles that can only send and receive messages. This paper proposes a possibly practical means of using machine learning to create two classes of narrow AI oracles that would provide chess advice: those aligned with the player's interest, and those that want the player to lose and give deceptively bad advice. The player would be uncertain which type of oracle it was interacting with. As the oracles would be vastly more intelligent than the player in the domain of chess, experience with these oracles might help us prepare for future artificial general intelligence oracles.

6.6CYJul 19, 2020
On Controllability of AI

Roman V. Yampolskiy

Invention of artificial general intelligence is predicted to cause a shift in the trajectory of human civilization. In order to reap the benefits and avoid pitfalls of such powerful technology it is important to be able to control it. However, possibility of controlling artificial general intelligence and its more advanced version, superintelligence, has not been formally established. In this paper, we present arguments as well as supporting evidence from multiple domains indicating that advanced AI can't be fully controlled. Consequences of uncontrollability of AI are discussed with respect to future of humanity and research on AI, and AI safety and security.

3.3CYJul 11, 2020
Human $\neq$ AGI

Roman V. Yampolskiy

Terms Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and Human-Level Artificial Intelligence (HLAI) have been used interchangeably to refer to the Holy Grail of Artificial Intelligence (AI) research, creation of a machine capable of achieving goals in a wide range of environments. However, widespread implicit assumption of equivalence between capabilities of AGI and HLAI appears to be unjustified, as humans are not general intelligences. In this paper, we will prove this distinction.

3.6AIJun 23, 2019
An AGI with Time-Inconsistent Preferences

James D. Miller, Roman Yampolskiy

This paper reveals a trap for artificial general intelligence (AGI) theorists who use economists' standard method of discounting. This trap is implicitly and falsely assuming that a rational AGI would have time-consistent preferences. An agent with time-inconsistent preferences knows that its future self will disagree with its current self concerning intertemporal decision making. Such an agent cannot automatically trust its future self to carry out plans that its current self considers optimal.

12.6AIMay 29, 2019
Unpredictability of AI

Roman V. Yampolskiy

The young field of AI Safety is still in the process of identifying its challenges and limitations. In this paper, we formally describe one such impossibility result, namely Unpredictability of AI. We prove that it is impossible to precisely and consistently predict what specific actions a smarter-than-human intelligent system will take to achieve its objectives, even if we know terminal goals of the system. In conclusion, impact of Unpredictability on AI Safety is discussed.

7.5AIJan 1, 2019
Personal Universes: A Solution to the Multi-Agent Value Alignment Problem

Roman V. Yampolskiy

AI Safety researchers attempting to align values of highly capable intelligent systems with those of humanity face a number of challenges including personal value extraction, multi-agent value merger and finally in-silico encoding. State-of-the-art research in value alignment shows difficulties in every stage in this process, but merger of incompatible preferences is a particularly difficult challenge to overcome. In this paper we assume that the value extraction problem will be solved and propose a possible way to implement an AI solution which optimally aligns with individual preferences of each user. We conclude by analyzing benefits and limitations of the proposed approach.

2.2LGNov 14, 2018
Emergence of Addictive Behaviors in Reinforcement Learning Agents

Vahid Behzadan, Roman V. Yampolskiy, Arslan Munir

This paper presents a novel approach to the technical analysis of wireheading in intelligent agents. Inspired by the natural analogues of wireheading and their prevalent manifestations, we propose the modeling of such phenomenon in Reinforcement Learning (RL) agents as psychological disorders. In a preliminary step towards evaluating this proposal, we study the feasibility and dynamics of emergent addictive policies in Q-learning agents in the tractable environment of the game of Snake. We consider a slightly modified settings for this game, in which the environment provides a "drug" seed alongside the original "healthy" seed for the consumption of the snake. We adopt and extend an RL-based model of natural addiction to Q-learning agents in this settings, and derive sufficient parametric conditions for the emergence of addictive behaviors in such agents. Furthermore, we evaluate our theoretical analysis with three sets of simulation-based experiments. The results demonstrate the feasibility of addictive wireheading in RL agents, and provide promising venues of further research on the psychopathological modeling of complex AI safety problems.

2.3CYOct 27, 2018
Uploading Brain into Computer: Whom to Upload First?

Yana B. Feygin, Kelly Morris, Roman V. Yampolskiy

The final goal of the intelligence augmentation process is a complete merger of biological brains and computers allowing for integration and mutual enhancement between computer's speed and memory and human's intelligence. This process, known as uploading, analyzes human brain in detail sufficient to understand its working patterns and makes it possible to simulate said brain on a computer. As it is likely that such simulations would quickly evolve or be modified to achieve superintelligence it is very important to make sure that the first brain chosen for such a procedure is a suitable one. In this paper, we attempt to answer the question: Whom to upload first?

4.8NEOct 12, 2018
Why We Do Not Evolve Software? Analysis of Evolutionary Algorithms

Roman V. Yampolskiy

In this paper, we review the state-of-the-art results in evolutionary computation and observe that we do not evolve non trivial software from scratch and with no human intervention. A number of possible explanations are considered, but we conclude that computational complexity of the problem prevents it from being solved as currently attempted. A detailed analysis of necessary and available computational resources is provided to support our findings.

1.2GLOct 2, 2018
Human Indignity: From Legal AI Personhood to Selfish Memes

Roman V. Yampolskiy

It is possible to rely on current corporate law to grant legal personhood to Artificially Intelligent (AI) agents. In this paper, after introducing pathways to AI personhood, we analyze consequences of such AI empowerment on human dignity, human safety and AI rights. We emphasize possibility of creating selfish memes and legal system hacking in the context of artificial entities. Finally, we consider some potential solutions for addressing described problems.

5.2CVSep 30, 2018
Optical Illusions Images Dataset

Robert Max Williams, Roman V. Yampolskiy

Human vision is capable of performing many tasks not optimized for in its long evolution. Reading text and identifying artificial objects such as road signs are both tasks that mammalian brains never encountered in the wild but are very easy for us to perform. However, humans have discovered many very specific tricks that cause us to misjudge color, size, alignment and movement of what we are looking at. A better understanding of these phenomenon could reveal insights into how human perception achieves these feats. In this paper we present a dataset of 6725 illusion images gathered from two websites, and a smaller dataset of 500 hand-picked images. We will discuss the process of collecting this data, models trained on it, and the work that needs to be done to make it of value to computer vision researchers.

8.5AIAug 11, 2018
Building Safer AGI by introducing Artificial Stupidity

Michaël Trazzi, Roman V. Yampolskiy

Artificial Intelligence (AI) achieved super-human performance in a broad variety of domains. We say that an AI is made Artificially Stupid on a task when some limitations are deliberately introduced to match a human's ability to do the task. An Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) can be made safer by limiting its computing power and memory, or by introducing Artificial Stupidity on certain tasks. We survey human intellectual limits and give recommendations for which limits to implement in order to build a safe AGI.

8.5AIMay 23, 2018
A Psychopathological Approach to Safety Engineering in AI and AGI

Vahid Behzadan, Arslan Munir, Roman V. Yampolskiy

The complexity of dynamics in AI techniques is already approaching that of complex adaptive systems, thus curtailing the feasibility of formal controllability and reachability analysis in the context of AI safety. It follows that the envisioned instances of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) will also suffer from challenges of complexity. To tackle such issues, we propose the modeling of deleterious behaviors in AI and AGI as psychological disorders, thereby enabling the employment of psychopathological approaches to analysis and control of misbehaviors. Accordingly, we present a discussion on the feasibility of the psychopathological approaches to AI safety, and propose general directions for research on modeling, diagnosis, and treatment of psychological disorders in AGI.

40.3AIFeb 20, 2018
The Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence: Forecasting, Prevention, and Mitigation

Miles Brundage, Shahar Avin, Jack Clark et al.

This report surveys the landscape of potential security threats from malicious uses of AI, and proposes ways to better forecast, prevent, and mitigate these threats. After analyzing the ways in which AI may influence the threat landscape in the digital, physical, and political domains, we make four high-level recommendations for AI researchers and other stakeholders. We also suggest several promising areas for further research that could expand the portfolio of defenses, or make attacks less effective or harder to execute. Finally, we discuss, but do not conclusively resolve, the long-term equilibrium of attackers and defenders.

9.2AIDec 11, 2017
Detecting Qualia in Natural and Artificial Agents

Roman V. Yampolskiy

The Hard Problem of consciousness has been dismissed as an illusion. By showing that computers are capable of experiencing, we show that they are at least rudimentarily conscious with potential to eventually reach superconsciousness. The main contribution of the paper is a test for confirming certain subjective experiences in a tested agent. We follow with analysis of benefits and problems with conscious machines and implications of such capability on future of computing, machine rights and artificial intelligence safety.

16.5AIJul 24, 2017
Guidelines for Artificial Intelligence Containment

James Babcock, Janos Kramar, Roman V. Yampolskiy

With almost daily improvements in capabilities of artificial intelligence it is more important than ever to develop safety software for use by the AI research community. Building on our previous work on AI Containment Problem we propose a number of guidelines which should help AI safety researchers to develop reliable sandboxing software for intelligent programs of all levels. Such safety container software will make it possible to study and analyze intelligent artificial agent while maintaining certain level of safety against information leakage, social engineering attacks and cyberattacks from within the container.

3.3CYJul 9, 2017
Evaluating race and sex diversity in the world's largest companies using deep neural networks

Konstantin Chekanov, Polina Mamoshina, Roman V. Yampolskiy et al.

Diversity is one of the fundamental properties for the survival of species, populations, and organizations. Recent advances in deep learning allow for the rapid and automatic assessment of organizational diversity and possible discrimination by race, sex, age and other parameters. Automating the process of assessing the organizational diversity using the deep neural networks and eliminating the human factor may provide a set of real-time unbiased reports to all stakeholders. In this pilot study we applied the deep-learned predictors of race and sex to the executive management and board member profiles of the 500 largest companies from the 2016 Forbes Global 2000 list and compared the predicted ratios to the ratios within each company's country of origin and ranked them by the sex-, age- and race- diversity index (DI). While the study has many limitations and no claims are being made concerning the individual companies, it demonstrates a method for the rapid and impartial assessment of organizational diversity using deep neural networks.

5.6AIMay 31, 2017
The Singularity May Be Near

Roman V. Yampolskiy

Toby Walsh in 'The Singularity May Never Be Near' gives six arguments to support his point of view that technological singularity may happen but that it is unlikely. In this paper, we provide analysis of each one of his arguments and arrive at similar conclusions, but with more weight given to the 'likely to happen' probability.

14.2AIMar 14, 2017
Towards Moral Autonomous Systems

Vicky Charisi, Louise Dennis, Michael Fisher et al.

Both the ethics of autonomous systems and the problems of their technical implementation have by now been studied in some detail. Less attention has been given to the areas in which these two separate concerns meet. This paper, written by both philosophers and engineers of autonomous systems, addresses a number of issues in machine ethics that are located at precisely the intersection between ethics and engineering. We first discuss the main challenges which, in our view, machine ethics posses to moral philosophy. We them consider different approaches towards the conceptual design of autonomous systems and their implications on the ethics implementation in such systems. Then we examine problematic areas regarding the specification and verification of ethical behavior in autonomous systems, particularly with a view towards the requirements of future legislation. We discuss transparency and accountability issues that will be crucial for any future wide deployment of autonomous systems in society. Finally we consider the, often overlooked, possibility of intentional misuse of AI systems and the possible dangers arising out of deliberately unethical design, implementation, and use of autonomous robots.

14.0AIOct 25, 2016
Artificial Intelligence Safety and Cybersecurity: a Timeline of AI Failures

Roman V. Yampolskiy, M. S. Spellchecker

In this work, we present and analyze reported failures of artificially intelligent systems and extrapolate our analysis to future AIs. We suggest that both the frequency and the seriousness of future AI failures will steadily increase. AI Safety can be improved based on ideas developed by cybersecurity experts. For narrow AIs safety failures are at the same, moderate, level of criticality as in cybersecurity, however for general AI, failures have a fundamentally different impact. A single failure of a superintelligent system may cause a catastrophic event without a chance for recovery. The goal of cybersecurity is to reduce the number of successful attacks on the system; the goal of AI Safety is to make sure zero attacks succeed in bypassing the safety mechanisms. Unfortunately, such a level of performance is unachievable. Every security system will eventually fail; there is no such thing as a 100% secure system.

6.3AISep 1, 2016
Verifier Theory and Unverifiability

Roman V. Yampolskiy

Despite significant developments in Proof Theory, surprisingly little attention has been devoted to the concept of proof verifier. In particular, the mathematical community may be interested in studying different types of proof verifiers (people, programs, oracles, communities, superintelligences) as mathematical objects. Such an effort could reveal their properties, their powers and limitations (particularly in human mathematicians), minimum and maximum complexity, as well as self-verification and self-reference issues. We propose an initial classification system for verifiers and provide some rudimentary analysis of solved and open problems in this important domain. Our main contribution is a formal introduction of the notion of unverifiability, for which the paper could serve as a general citation in domains of theorem proving, as well as software and AI verification.

18.5AIMay 10, 2016
Unethical Research: How to Create a Malevolent Artificial Intelligence

Federico Pistono, Roman V. Yampolskiy

Cybersecurity research involves publishing papers about malicious exploits as much as publishing information on how to design tools to protect cyber-infrastructure. It is this information exchange between ethical hackers and security experts, which results in a well-balanced cyber-ecosystem. In the blooming domain of AI Safety Engineering, hundreds of papers have been published on different proposals geared at the creation of a safe machine, yet nothing, to our knowledge, has been published on how to design a malevolent machine. Availability of such information would be of great value particularly to computer scientists, mathematicians, and others who have an interest in AI safety, and who are attempting to avoid the spontaneous emergence or the deliberate creation of a dangerous AI, which can negatively affect human activities and in the worst case cause the complete obliteration of the human species. This paper provides some general guidelines for the creation of a Malevolent Artificial Intelligence (MAI).

13.4AINov 10, 2015
Taxonomy of Pathways to Dangerous AI

Roman V. Yampolskiy

In order to properly handle a dangerous Artificially Intelligent (AI) system it is important to understand how the system came to be in such a state. In popular culture (science fiction movies/books) AIs/Robots became self-aware and as a result rebel against humanity and decide to destroy it. While it is one possible scenario, it is probably the least likely path to appearance of dangerous AI. In this work, we survey, classify and analyze a number of circumstances, which might lead to arrival of malicious AI. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first attempt to systematically classify types of pathways leading to malevolent AI. Previous relevant work either surveyed specific goals/meta-rules which might lead to malevolent behavior in AIs (Özkural, 2014) or reviewed specific undesirable behaviors AGIs can exhibit at different stages of its development (Alexey Turchin, July 10 2015, July 10, 2015).

13.4AIFeb 23, 2015
From Seed AI to Technological Singularity via Recursively Self-Improving Software

Roman V. Yampolskiy

Software capable of improving itself has been a dream of computer scientists since the inception of the field. In this work we provide definitions for Recursively Self-Improving software, survey different types of self-improving software, review the relevant literature, analyze limits on computation restricting recursive self-improvement and introduce RSI Convergence Theory which aims to predict general behavior of RSI systems. Finally, we address security implications from self-improving intelligent software.

7.4AIOct 1, 2014
The Universe of Minds

Roman V. Yampolskiy

The paper attempts to describe the space of possible mind designs by first equating all minds to software. Next it proves some interesting properties of the mind design space such as infinitude of minds, size and representation complexity of minds. A survey of mind design taxonomies is followed by a proposal for a new field of investigation devoted to study of minds, intellectology, a list of open problems for this new field is presented.