Kehan Sheng

h-index7
2papers

2 Papers

34.2CYJun 3
Prioritization of Risks from Artificial Intelligence: A Delphi Study of 272 International Experts

Alexander K. Saeri, Jess Graham, Michael Noetel et al.

Artificial intelligence poses many risks, ranging from familiar present-day harms to unprecedented and potentially catastrophic ones. Effective risk management requires prioritization: we must understand which risks are most severe, who is most vulnerable, and who is most responsible for addressing them. We report results from a three-round Delphi study conducted late 2025 with 272 international AI experts. Experts rated 24 AI risks on harm probability and severity, sector and actor vulnerability, actor responsibility, and overall concern. Experts estimated the five most severe harms in the next 5 years were likely to come from dangerous capabilities, competitive dynamics, weapons & cyberattacks (including CBRNE), power centralization, and false information. In a business-as-usual scenario, experts judged 18 of 24 risks as having a more than 10% probability of catastrophic outcomes (e.g., more than 1 million deaths or more than USD 100B in financial loss) in the next 5 years (2025-2030). In a scenario where pragmatic mitigations are implemented, experts still judged five risks as having a more than 10% probability of catastrophic outcomes: dangerous capabilities, weapons & cyberattacks, environmental harm, inequality & unemployment, and power centralization. All 24 risks were judged as being more than 5% likely to cause catastrophic outcomes. AI users and the general public were judged the most vulnerable to these risks, but experts assigned the highest responsibility for addressing them to general-purpose AI developers and governance actors (including governments, regulators, and standards bodies). Across most risks, experts identified information, finance, and national security as the most vulnerable sectors. These findings can guide AI risk prioritization and clarify expert expectations about who should bear responsibility for mitigation.

CYFeb 27, 2025Code
The erasure of intensive livestock farming in text-to-image generative AI

Kehan Sheng, Frank A. M. Tuyttens, Marina A. G. von Keyserlingk

Generative AI (e.g., ChatGPT) is increasingly integrated into people's daily lives. While it is known that AI perpetuates biases against marginalized human groups, their impact on non-human animals remains understudied. We found that ChatGPT's text-to-image model (DALL-E 3) introduces a strong bias toward romanticizing livestock farming as dairy cows on pasture and pigs rooting in mud. This bias remained when we requested realistic depictions and was only mitigated when the automatic prompt revision was inhibited. Most farmed animal in industrialized countries are reared indoors with limited space per animal, which fail to resonate with societal values. Inhibiting prompt revision resulted in images that more closely reflected modern farming practices; for example, cows housed indoors accessing feed through metal headlocks, and pigs behind metal railings on concrete floors in indoor facilities. While OpenAI introduced prompt revision to mitigate bias, in the case of farmed animal production systems, it paradoxically introduces a strong bias towards unrealistic farming practices.