19 citations · 69 across the 15 of their papers we have counts for
6 papers · 1 filter
Can AI agents conduct open-ended AI research? Early evidence from two case studies
Peter Kirgis, Sayash Kapoor, Andrew Schwartz +21
Forecasts of explosive AI progress hinge on AI agents automating AI research. But evidence on whether agents can carry out open-ended AI research is thin. Current evaluations eithe…
Life After Benchmark Saturation: A Case Study of CORE-Bench
Nitya Nadgir, Sayash Kapoor, Kangheng Liu +11
When a benchmark's accuracy saturates, it is often retired and replaced with a more challenging version. We show that this approach privileges accuracy and misses the opportunity t…
Open-World Evaluations for Measuring Frontier AI Capabilities
Sayash Kapoor, Peter Kirgis, Andrew Schwartz +15
Benchmark-based evaluation remains important for tracking frontier AI progress. But it can both overstate and understate deployed capability because it privileges tasks that can be…
Towards a Science of AI Agent Reliability
Stephan Rabanser, Sayash Kapoor, Peter Kirgis +3
AI agents are increasingly deployed to execute important tasks. While rising accuracy scores on standard benchmarks suggest rapid progress, many agents still continue to fail in pr…
In-House Evaluation Is Not Enough: Towards Robust Third-Party Flaw Disclosure for General-Purpose AI
Shayne Longpre, Kevin Klyman, Ruth E. Appel +31
The widespread deployment of general-purpose AI (GPAI) systems introduces significant new risks. Yet the infrastructure, practices, and norms for reporting flaws in GPAI systems re…
A Safe Harbor for AI Evaluation and Red Teaming
Shayne Longpre, Sayash Kapoor, Kevin Klyman +20
Independent evaluation and red teaming are critical for identifying the risks posed by generative AI systems. However, the terms of service and enforcement strategies used by promi…