How Can Biosafety Inform AI Safety?

Publication date
September 1, 2023
authors
Olivia Jimenez
share
Abstract

read full paper

Many AI scientists and other notable figures now believe that AI poses a risk of extinction on par with pandemics and nuclear war. A sufficiently powerful AI could self-replicate beyond developers’ control. Less powerful AI could also be misused. Given these risks, it is crucial that AI research be held to high standards of caution, trustworthiness, security, and oversight. 

To determine what AI research standards should be and how they should be implemented, it may be helpful to consider precedents from other fields conducting dangerous research. 

This memo outlines select standards in biosafety, with a focus on how high-risk biological agents are treated in biosafety level (BSL) 3 and 4 labs in the United States. It then considers how similar standards could be applied to high-risk AI research. The covered topics include:

  1. High-risk research must be conducted in designated labs subject to stringent standards.
  2. Personnel must be trained and screened for reliability.
  3. Someone at each lab is responsible for safety, and they are empowered to shut projects down if they determine them to be unsafe.
  4. Physical and information security are prioritised.
  5. Labs record and respond to every incident and plan for emergencies.
  6. Labs have extensive oversight from governments and independent auditors.

Back to top


Publication date
September 1, 2023
authors
Olivia Jimenez
share
Related Content
  • 17.09.2026
  • Paper
Open Problems in AI Risk Modeling: Insights from a Workshop on the Technical Foundations of AI Risk Modeling
Krystal Jackson, Deepika Raman, Jakub Kryś, Sean P. Fillingham, Jack Kengott, Andrew Lohn, Nada Madkour, Henry Papadatos, James Sykes, Anna Katariina Wisakanto, Malcolm Murray
  • 02.08.2026
  • Technical Report
GLM-5.2 Risk Evaluation Report
Chinmayi Dixit*, Jacob Davies*, Jasmine Li, Benedict Bruckamp, Jack Kengott, Henry Papadatos
  • 16.07.2026
  • Paper
Lessons from External Review of DeepMind’s Scheming Inability Safety Case
Stephen Barrett, Francisco Javier Campos Zabala, Sean P. Fillingham, Umair Siddique, James Walpole, Robin Bloomfield, Henry Papadatos