Skip to content
Longterm Wiki

Comparison – Risk Management Ratings

web
ratings.safer-ai.org·ratings.safer-ai.org/comparison/

This page presents a comparative rating table from safer-ai.org evaluating major AI companies across 65+ risk management criteria, providing structured accountability data relevant to AI governance and safety practices.

Metadata

Importance: 62/100tool pagereference

Summary

This comparison table from safer-ai.org rates frontier AI companies on over 65 risk management criteria, including risk identification, risk modeling, risk tolerance, and key risk indicators. Companies receive overall scores and granular sub-scores, with best-in-class benchmarks highlighted to encourage adoption of leading practices. The ratings are based on a defined methodology and include detailed explanations for each score.

Key Points

  • •Rates major AI companies on 65+ risk management criteria with overall scores ranging from ~1% to 34% among frontier companies.
  • •Criteria span risk identification, unknown risk discovery (open-ended red teaming), risk modeling, risk tolerance setting, and operationalization.
  • •Scores are broken down hierarchically, allowing granular comparison on sub-criteria like third-party red teaming and quantitative risk tolerance.
  • •Best-in-class scores are highlighted per criterion to encourage industry-wide adoption of leading risk management practices.
  • •Detailed rationale and supporting quotes are accessible by clicking individual scores, providing transparency in the rating methodology.

Cached Content Preview

HTTP 200Fetched May 4, 202612 KB
Comparison table

 presenting our findings

 Our methodology allows for extensive, apples-to-apples comparisons between companies on over 65 different risk management criteria.

 The table below shows both overall ratings, and ratings for each criterion. We also present the best in class for each criterion, to encourage other companies to adopt these industry-leading risk management practices. 

 For more detail on the rationale behind each rating, you can click on the score itself to see a detailed explanation with supporting quotes. To see a company's full breakdown, you can click on the company icon.

 For more detail on how scores are calculated, you can click to see our methodology at the button below.

 See our methodology 

 Filter: All
 Frontier Companies
 Click logos to visit company pages Overall score 34% 33% 24% 21% 20% 18% 18% 16% 16% 11% 10% 8% 1. Risk Identification 26% 32% 17% 23% 22% 7% 11% 22% 14% 12% 7% 7% 1.1 Classification of Applicable Known Risks (40%) 38% 63% 25% 18% 43% 13% 13% 25% 18% 25% 13% 10% 1.1.1 Risks from literature and taxonomies are well covered (50%) 50% 75% 25% 25% 75% 25% 25% 50% 25% 50% 25% 10% 1.1.2 Exclusions are clearly justified and documented (50%) 25% 50% 25% 10% 10% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% 10% 1.2 Identification of Unknown Risks (Open-ended red teaming) (20%) 0% 0% 7% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 7% 0% 0% 0% 1.2.1 Internal open-ended red teaming (70%) 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 10% 0% 0% 0% 1.2.2 Third party open-ended red teaming (30%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1.3 Risk modeling (40%) 29% 18% 15% 41% 13% 5% 11% 31% 14% 4% 4% 9% 1.3.1 The company uses risk models for all the risk domains identified
and the risk models are published (with potentially dangerous
information redacted) (40%) 25% 25% 10% 50% 25% 0% 10% 50% 25% 10% 10% 10% 1.3.2 Risk modeling methodology (40%) 21% 9% 2% 39% 9% 8% 4% 2% 9% 0% 0% 11% 1.3.2.1 Methodology precisely defined (70%) 25% 10% 0% 50% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1.3.2.2 Mechanism to incorporate red teaming findings (15%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% 0% 1.3.2.3 Prioritization of severe and probable risks (15%) 25% 10% 10% 25% 10% 50% 25% 10% 50% 0% 0% 75% 1.3.3 Third party validation of risk models (20%) 50% 25% 50% 25% 0% 10% 25% 50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2. Risk Analysis and Evaluation 21% 28% 18% 27% 21% 13% 16% 21% 11% 14% 7% 5% 2.1 Setting a Risk Tolerance (35%) 7% 16% 7% 22% 4% 7% 7% 13% 3% 9% 3% 3% 2.1.1 Risk tolerance is defined (80%) 8% 20% 8% 28% 3% 8% 8% 17% 3% 12% 3% 3% 2.1.1.1 Risk tolerance is at least qualitatively defined for all risks (33%) 25% 50% 25% 75% 10% 25% 25% 50% 10% 25% 10% 10% 2.1.1.2 Risk tolerance is expressed at least partly quantitatively as a combination of scenarios (qualitative) and probabilities (quantitative) for all risks (33%) 0% 10% 0% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% 2.1.1.3 Risk tolerance is expressed fully quantitatively as a product of severity (quantitative) and probability (quantitative) for all risks (33%) None 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

... (truncated, 12 KB total)
Resource ID: fc92592d3fa96e79 | Stable ID: sid_jFsqAtKnEQ