Longterm Wiki
Page StatusAI Transition Model

AI Transition Model

View:
High X-risk impact (>70)+Click to expand description
Root Factors4 high priority
22 of 22 results
Technical AI SafetyAIMisalignment Potential
45
60
85
70
View →
AI GovernanceAIMisalignment Potential
55
50
60
75
View →
Lab Safety PracticesAIMisalignment Potential
65
40
50
45
View →
GovernanceAICivilizational Competence
35
45
55
70
View →
EpistemicsAICivilizational Competence
25
55
40
65
View →
AdaptabilityAICivilizational Competence
30
50
50
60
View →
ComputeAIAI CapabilitiesView →
AlgorithmsAIAI Capabilities
20
55
75
85
View →
AdoptionAIAI Capabilities
40
40
45
70
View →
Economic StabilitySocietyTransition Turbulence
40
50
35
55
View →
Racing IntensitySocietyTransition Turbulence
50
45
65
50
View →
Recursive AI CapabilitiesAIAI Uses
35
70
85
90
View →
IndustriesAIAI Uses
30
35
30
75
View →
GovernmentsAIAI Uses
40
50
55
70
View →
CoordinationAIAI Uses
45
55
40
65
View →
Biological Threat ExposureSocietyMisuse Potential
45
60
80
40
View →
Cyber Threat ExposureSocietyMisuse Potential
35
50
55
45
View →
Robot Threat ExposureSocietyMisuse Potential
40
65
60
50
View →
Surprise Threat ExposureSocietyMisuse Potential
20
85
70
55
View →
CountriesAIAI Ownership
25
50
45
65
View →
CompaniesAIAI Ownership
35
45
50
70
View →
ShareholdersAIAI Ownership
30
40
25
60
View →
Ultimate Scenarios3 high priority
9 of 9 results
RapidAI Takeover
40
70
95
85
View →
GradualAI Takeover
55
60
80
90
View →
State ActorHuman-Caused Catastrophe
45
55
75
70
View →
Rogue ActorHuman-Caused Catastrophe
35
65
70
45
View →
Economic PowerLong-term Lock-inView →
Political PowerLong-term Lock-inView →
EpistemicsLong-term Lock-inView →
ValuesLong-term Lock-inView →
Suffering Lock InLong-term Lock-inView →

The AI Transition Model is a causal framework for understanding how various factors influence the trajectory of AI development and its ultimate outcomes for humanity. The interactive diagram above shows how Root Factors flow through Ultimate Scenarios to determine Ultimate Outcomes.

This model helps identify:

  1. Leverage points: Which factors have the most influence on outcomes
  2. Intervention targets: Where effort can most effectively shift trajectories
  3. Key uncertainties: Which causal relationships are most uncertain
  4. Scenario dependencies: How different pathways interact

How Parameters, Risks, and Interventions Connect

Both risks and interventions connect to root factors:

  • Risks (like deceptive alignment, racing dynamics) tend to increase harmful factors or decrease protective ones
  • Interventions (like interpretability research, compute governance) work to counteract risks

Interactive Views:

  • Parameter Table - Sortable tables with ratings (changeability, uncertainty, x-risk impact, trajectory)
  • Graph View - Visual causal diagram showing relationships between factors, scenarios, and outcomes

Why This Framing Matters

Traditional Risk Framing

  • "Trust erosion is a risk we must prevent"
  • "Concentration of power threatens democracy"
  • Focus: Avoiding negative outcomes

Parameter Framing

  • "Trust is a parameter that AI affects in both directions"
  • "Power distribution is a variable we can influence through policy"
  • Focus: Understanding dynamics and identifying intervention points

The parameter framing enables:

  1. Better modeling: Can estimate current levels, trends, and intervention effects
  2. Clearer priorities: Which parameters matter most for good outcomes?
  3. Strategic allocation: Where should resources go to maintain critical parameters?
  4. Progress tracking: Are our interventions actually improving parameter levels?

Relationship to Other Sections

SectionRelationship to Parameters
RisksMany risks describe decreases in parameters (e.g., "trust erosion" = trust declining)
InterventionsInterventions aim to increase or stabilize parameters
MetricsMetrics are concrete measurements of parameter levels
ModelsAnalytical models often estimate parameter dynamics and trajectories

How to Use This Section

For Researchers

  • Understand which underlying variables matter for AI outcomes
  • Identify gaps between current and optimal parameter levels
  • Design studies to measure parameter changes

For Policymakers

  • Prioritize interventions based on which parameters are most degraded
  • Monitor parameter trends to assess policy effectiveness
  • Coordinate across domains (a single parameter may affect multiple risks)

For Forecasters

  • Use parameters as input variables for scenario modeling
  • Estimate how different interventions would shift parameter levels
  • Identify tipping points where parameter degradation becomes irreversible

Related Pages

Top Related Pages

Approaches

Sandboxing / ContainmentStructured Access / API-OnlyTool-Use RestrictionsAI Governance Coordination TechnologiesEliciting Latent Knowledge (ELK)Weak-to-Strong Generalization

Policy

Compute ThresholdsVoluntary AI Safety CommitmentsInternational Coordination MechanismsUS Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy AI

Risks

Cyberweapons RiskAI-Induced Enfeeblement

Safety Research

AI ControlAI Evaluations

Key Debates

AI Alignment Research AgendasAI Governance and Policy

Analysis

AI Policy Effectiveness

Concepts

RLHF

Transition Model

AI Capabilities