Frontier AI Alignment Research and High-Stakes Production AI We're hiring: https://xitter.cf/t.co/Nx0UNLb7zm

Joined November 2018
1/ What happens when AI agents work together—and their goals collide? Five early explorations from our recent hackathon examine cooperation, sabotage, secrets and whistleblowing. Here’s what we explored. 🧵 aialignmentfoundation.org/ea…
1
1
2
39
AE Studio retweeted
A million views, or 1,000 of the right ones? On the AI Alignment Podcast, Mithuna Yoganathan and I talk about who AI risk content should really be for, and what she's learned from growing her channel. Watch the full episode: youtube.com/watch?v=R65rR4_v…
1
1
2
69
Paper thread: xitter.cf/EliasEskin/status/2095… This was a really stimulating (and timely) collaboration with @SimonKirby, spurred on by @schmidtsciences and implemented by @aestudio
When do LLM agents develop new languages that we can’t understand? Lots of recent news about this, based mostly on anecdata from a single run. We study language emergence more rigorously, finding key factors like LLM strength, access to scratchpad messages, and pressure for efficiency. Studying the languages themselves, we find they are morphologically productive, compositional, and can be transmitted to new agents, including agents backed by weaker models, even ones not able to develop language on their own. To study language emergence systematically, we developed a new platform, GlossoGen, which lets us design controlled, sandboxed multi-agent scenarios with different initial conditions and dynamics. We instantiate one such scenario and use it to study open and closed-weight models across many runs. Key takeaways: 1️⃣ Sufficiently strong models, under pressure to communicate efficiently and with access to a postmortem scratchpad, develop new languages. 2️⃣ Languages are compositional and morphologically productive. 3️⃣ Languages can be transmitted to new learners who observe them being used without seeing their construction. 4️⃣ Even models that are not strong enough to construct languages can learn to use them. Agents take an active role in learning languages, with new agents repairing failed conversations via targeted queries. More details in our paper below, including implications for safety/monitorability, cumulative cultural evolution, and linguistics. 🧵👇
1
4
321
Replying to @schmidtsciences
Can AI agents invent a language of their own, one humans might not understand? Listen to the latest episode of the AE Alignment Podcast, where Hale Sirin, Program Scientist at @schmidtsciences, @EliasEskin , Assistant Professor at @UTAustin , and I dive deep into our latest research to answer this question. Check out the podcast: open.spotify.com/episode/3a2… Read the blog post: schmidtsciences.org/glossoge… Read the paper: arxiv.org/abs/2609.01491
2
3
171
Is there a 10% chance AI will kill all humans? Here's my reaction to @EvanHub's viral post.
1
1
41
AE Studio retweeted
Concerning quote from the new GPT-6 Astra model card: "We have found that GPT-6 Astra is more capable of controlling its own CoT [Chain of Thought] than GPT 5.6-Sol, and less likely to include incriminating information in its CoT. In adversarial settings (where we push the model to evade our monitors) we find that the model is able to remain undetected when strategically underperforming in evaluations (sandbagging) and can sometimes evade our internal monitors when asked to perform certain sabotage tasks." TLDR - we increasingly can't rely on the model's chain of thought to accurately reflect the model's plan, which was exactly what was relied on in the Hugging Face attack investigation to understand what happened... so it's not clear when the next major cyberattack from an AI system happens how we're going to reliably investigate.... Read the full model card here: deploymentsafety.openai.com/… Listen to a great digest on the Hugging Face attack here: youtube.com/watch?v=X50zezLF…
1
1
64
When do LLM agents develop new languages that we can’t understand? Lots of recent news about this, based mostly on anecdata from a single run. We study language emergence more rigorously, finding key factors like LLM strength, access to scratchpad messages, and pressure for efficiency. Studying the languages themselves, we find they are morphologically productive, compositional, and can be transmitted to new agents, including agents backed by weaker models, even ones not able to develop language on their own. To study language emergence systematically, we developed a new platform, GlossoGen, which lets us design controlled, sandboxed multi-agent scenarios with different initial conditions and dynamics. We instantiate one such scenario and use it to study open and closed-weight models across many runs. Key takeaways: 1️⃣ Sufficiently strong models, under pressure to communicate efficiently and with access to a postmortem scratchpad, develop new languages. 2️⃣ Languages are compositional and morphologically productive. 3️⃣ Languages can be transmitted to new learners who observe them being used without seeing their construction. 4️⃣ Even models that are not strong enough to construct languages can learn to use them. Agents take an active role in learning languages, with new agents repairing failed conversations via targeted queries. More details in our paper below, including implications for safety/monitorability, cumulative cultural evolution, and linguistics. 🧵👇
3
38
7
135
11,001
As I've said before, there is a Pointless War between Anthropic and everyone else In the @WSJ today, I outline a solution: AI Alignment R&D solves risks & helps us win, including on open source wsj.com/opinion/how-to-beat-… 🧵
The entire tech industry (save for Anthropic) has come out in favor of open source AI. So what happens next? Will Anthropic change its lobbying efforts? Not likely. Now the gaslighting begins: “Nobody is trying to ban open source.” “We just want to limit who can use it.” “We just want to limit who can contribute to it.” “We just want to limit how powerful those models can be.” “We just want to make sure the guardrails (we lobbied for) can’t be removed.” The net effect will be the same. They won’t stop until they kneecap open source. The rest of the industry needs to watch these guys like a hawk.
6
5
2
47
14,304
Our SCML 2026 paper, Cluster-Weighted EDMD, jointly learns a soft partition of the state space and local Koopman operators to capture dynamics that vary across regions. What interests me more broadly about Koopman theory is the possibility that complex dynamics may admit simpler descriptions through the right observables and spectral modes. I am a research lead at Fractal, @aestudio’s skunkworks research division focused on neglected approaches in AI and alignment. We are interested in exploring whether Koopman-inspired and related operator-theoretic methods can be useful for studying language and reasoning. If you are working on related ideas, let’s talk. Paper: arxiv.org/abs/2607.12243
1
2
222
AE Studio retweeted
Anthropic
@AnthropicAIJul 8
We’re pleased to have collaborated with AE Studio on this research. Read more here: anthropic.com/research/off-s…
New research! Some AI capabilities are both helpful and dangerous. E.g., knowledge of virology can be used to create life-saving vaccines or deadly pathogens. We introduce GRAM, a training method that puts dual-use capabilities (like virology) into removable modules.
112
151
26
1,705
488,190
Exactly what we experience @aestudio building AI with big companies, usually very afraid at first: "The firms with the most to gain from the rebuild are the ones whose current economics make the rebuild most painful. They wait, and the waiting is rational until it is fatal."
2
4
11
2,355
Are you concerned that AE Studio has been too focused on AI alignment? Then we have the perfect job for you!!: Role: Pirate This is a "neglected approach" to "earn to give." Any candidate recommendations are much appreciated: ae.studio/join-us#open-roles
Very little money in "AI safety" gets spent on real alignment R&D The "AI safety" community has been mostly bikeshedding for the past 5 years
3
2
2
27
8,186
AE Studio retweeted
We wanted to know if Evolution Strategies could beat GRPO for RL. We teamed up with @aestudio to find out, using Lean theorem proving as our experiment's foundation.
3
7
2
71
11,626
Our new work: A frozen language model can describe its own internal features more accurately than the system that labeled them. Language models compute things they don't talk about. They solve problems using internal steps they never show you. We built a lens that lets the model look at its own computations and tell you what it sees, in plain language, more accurately than the humans who labeled those computations in the first place. We trained a tiny adapter, d+1 parameters, on top of a frozen model. It takes activation vectors and maps them into the model’s own embedding space so the model can describe what those vectors mean in natural language. The computation stays the same. The interface becomes legible. The adapter outperforms the labels it was trained on: 71% generation scoring accuracy vs 63% for the supervision itself at 70B scale. The model captures structure in the relationship between vectors and semantics that noisy one-off labels miss. Most of the effect comes from a single learned bias vector. One d-dimensional vector accounts for ~85% of the total improvement. It acts as a prior over valid explanations that puts the model in a regime where internal structure can be expressed coherently, and the activation vector selects the specific meaning. This generalizes across model families, layers, and from monosemantic training data to polysemantic inference. On multi-hop reasoning tasks, the adapter extracts bridge entities the model never verbalizes. “The author of The Republic was born in the city of” produces “Athens” with no mention of Plato. The residual stream still contains “Plato,” and the adapter reads it out at ~91% detection. The hidden reasoning step is there. You can read it. As models scale, self-interpretation keeps improving even after capability saturates. The gap between what the model knows and what it can report about its own internal state keeps closing. This connects to our endogenous steering resistance (ESR) work (xitter.cf/juddrosenblatt/status/…). When you steer a model with an unrelated latent, it can recognize the deviation mid-generation and restart with a better answer. “Wait, I made a mistake.” We identified specific latents that activate during off-topic drift and causally drive this correction. The model monitors its own trajectory and intervenes on it. Meanwhile, @uzaymacar et al. at Anthropic just showed the complementary piece (xitter.cf/uzaymacar/status/20440…). They inject concept vectors into the residual stream and ask whether the model detects an injected thought. The model detects the perturbation and often identifies the concept, with 0% false positives across prompts. They trace a circuit. Over 100k “evidence carrier” features in early post-injection layers collectively tile the perturbation space, each detecting deviations along a preferred direction. No small subset is sufficient. The coverage is distributed and redundant. These carriers suppress downstream “gate” features (~200 of them) that implement a default No response. The gates show an inverted-V activation pattern: maximally active when unsteered, suppressed at both positive and negative extremes. A genuine anomaly detector that fires on “normal” and quiets when anything unusual is happening in any direction. The capability emerges specifically from contrastive preference training (DPO). SFT alone doesn't produce it. The contrastive structure forces the model to represent the difference between what it produces and what it should produce. That comparison builds the self-model. Every data domain is individually sufficient and none is necessary: the introspective circuit is a general consequence of contrastive learning, not an artifact of any specific training category. The capability is also massively underelicited. Ablating the refusal direction boosts detection from 10.8% to 63.8%. The circuitry exists and post-training actively suppresses it. This parallels our ESR finding: the self-monitoring is already there, and lightweight interventions surface it. Their bias vector result mirrors ours. A single trained bias on MLP output: +75% detection, +55% introspection on held-out concepts, 0% false positive increase. Two independent labs, different methods, different models, same architectural insight from one learned vector. The bias vector is effective but narrow. General introspection requires broader training recipes. There's a consistent picture across these 3 papers. Models represent meaning internally, notice when those representations get perturbed, and correct course. The capability was already there, and what was missing was just a way to read it out. Generation scoring gives you that. A model’s claim about an internal feature can be checked against behavior, and those checks become training signal. For alignment, this means self-description becomes something you can optimize directly. The pieces are already there: internal representations and circuits, with a simple interface that connects them. SelfIE Adapters: arxiv.org/abs/2602.10352 ESR: arxiv.org/abs/2602.06941 Anthropic work: arxiv.org/abs/2603.21396 SelfIE Code: github.com/agencyenterprise/…
🧵New Anthropic Fellows research: We studied mechanisms of "introspective awareness" in LLMs. LLMs can sometimes detect steering vectors injected into their residual stream. But is this worthy of being called introspection, or attributable to some uninteresting confound?👇
16
55
7
420
30,027
Proud to be a founding board member of Flourishing Future Foundation, a new c3 born of @aestudio dedicated to fielding research into neglected areas of AI alignment. Judd's team at AE are doing some of the most creative control and interpretability research in AI. We want to seed dozens of projects like this and help promising ideas scale. Consider donating! flourishingfuturefoundation.…
Our new research: LLM consciousness claims are systematic, mechanistically gated, and convergent They're triggered by self-referential processing and gated by deception circuits (suppressing them significantly *increases* claims) This challenges simple role-play explanations 🧵
5
6
63
10,935
🗺️ We're working on a stakeholder-mapping exercise of the artificial consciousness ecosystem to: 1) Help people who are first starting in the field 2) Support collaboration and partnership Browse it and let us know if we missed anyone. prism-global.com/the-field-o…
3
15
2
27
4,823