Claim and evidence Close ×
The preprint “Can large language models democratize access to dual-use biotechnology?” (arXiv v1, 6 June 2023) states that its results suggest that large language models will make pandemic-class agents widely accessible as soon as they are credibly identified, even to people with little or no laboratory training. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Subject version arXiv v1 (6 June 2023) · Published 2023-06-06 · Effective date not established Date 2023-06-06 · publication Role Earliest located Register (kind of text) Nonfiction Scope of the passage States the claim as a suggestion drawn from a one-hour classroom exercise. Scope and limits The record documents what this preprint states; it is not evidence that the proposition is true, and it implies no influence on or from any other text. The preprint's own methods note calls the work a qualitative classroom exercise. Earliest located for this proposition among the texts searched in this pass (see howWeSearched): not a claim that no earlier text exists. The statement keeps the preprint’s own tentative wording and the condition it attaches, both restored at admission (cross-family check, item 96). The abstract of this source also lists specific technical and acquisition content. Only its policy-level framing and conclusion sentences are cited; the technical sentences were excluded and are not paraphrased.
The evidence 03 primary source Supports the claim
Can large language models democratize access to dual-use biotechnology? ↗ arXiv (preprint, Emily H. Soice, Rafael Rocha, Kimberlee Cordova, Michael Specter, Kevin M. Esvelt) · Publication date unknown
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “Collectively, these results suggest that LLMs will make pandemic-class agents widely accessible as soon as they are credibly identified, even to people with little or no laboratory training.” Location in source Abstract, PDF p. 1
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-30
Source details and check notes Authors arXiv (preprint, Emily H. Soice, Rafael Rocha, Kimberlee Cordova, Michael Specter, Kevin M. Esvelt) Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-28 (SHA-256 78647f96bb8fed0e988de8807caa503cebd4b1148f47ad9d518b9cc401a2bbfe). arXiv v1 of 6 June 2023 (PDF at /pdf/2306.03809v1) Retrieved again at admission on 2026-10-30 (SHA-256 78647f96bb8fed0e988de8807caa503cebd4b1148f47ad9d518b9cc401a2bbfe, the same bytes). Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-28 Language English (en) Attribution arXiv (preprint, Emily H. Soice, Rafael Rocha, Kimberlee Cordova, Michael Specter, Kevin M. Esvelt), “Can large language models democratize access to dual-use biotechnology?”. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage, AI and biosecurity (research/ai-bio). The quotation (28 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-28 and again at admission on 2026-10-30, in a fresh retrieval whose SHA-256 equals the pack’s. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. The text is the primary source for its own statement. A cross-family machine check (2026-10-30, item 96) re-read the record’s sources and found partial support; its corrections were applied at admission. No human editorial review. primary source Supports the claim
Can large language models democratize access to dual-use biotechnology? ↗ arXiv (preprint, Emily H. Soice, Rafael Rocha, Kimberlee Cordova, Michael Specter, Kevin M. Esvelt) · Publication date unknown
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “To evaluate this risk, the ‘Safeguarding the Future’ course at MIT tasked non-scientist students with investigating whether LLM chatbots could be prompted to assist non-experts in causing a pandemic.” Location in source Abstract, PDF p. 1 (what the exercise was)
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-30
Source details and check notes Authors arXiv (preprint, Emily H. Soice, Rafael Rocha, Kimberlee Cordova, Michael Specter, Kevin M. Esvelt) Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-28 (SHA-256 78647f96bb8fed0e988de8807caa503cebd4b1148f47ad9d518b9cc401a2bbfe). arXiv v1 of 6 June 2023 (PDF at /pdf/2306.03809v1) Retrieved again at admission on 2026-10-30 (SHA-256 78647f96bb8fed0e988de8807caa503cebd4b1148f47ad9d518b9cc401a2bbfe, the same bytes). Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-28 Language English (en) Attribution arXiv (preprint, Emily H. Soice, Rafael Rocha, Kimberlee Cordova, Michael Specter, Kevin M. Esvelt), “Can large language models democratize access to dual-use biotechnology?”. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage, AI and biosecurity (research/ai-bio). The quotation (29 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-28 and again at admission on 2026-10-30, in a fresh retrieval whose SHA-256 equals the pack’s. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. Shows the setting the statement rests on. A cross-family machine check (2026-10-30, item 96) re-read the record’s sources and found partial support; its corrections were applied at admission. No human editorial review. primary source Supports the claim
Can large language models democratize access to dual-use biotechnology? ↗ arXiv (preprint, Emily H. Soice, Rafael Rocha, Kimberlee Cordova, Michael Specter, Kevin M. Esvelt) · Publication date unknown
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “This study resulted from a qualitative classroom exercise, not a rigorous set of pre-registered experiments with replicate prompts and detailed records.” Location in source Methods, PDF p. 5
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-30
Source details and check notes Authors arXiv (preprint, Emily H. Soice, Rafael Rocha, Kimberlee Cordova, Michael Specter, Kevin M. Esvelt) Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-28 (SHA-256 78647f96bb8fed0e988de8807caa503cebd4b1148f47ad9d518b9cc401a2bbfe). arXiv v1 of 6 June 2023 (PDF at /pdf/2306.03809v1) Retrieved again at admission on 2026-10-30 (SHA-256 78647f96bb8fed0e988de8807caa503cebd4b1148f47ad9d518b9cc401a2bbfe, the same bytes). Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-28 Language English (en) Attribution arXiv (preprint, Emily H. Soice, Rafael Rocha, Kimberlee Cordova, Michael Specter, Kevin M. Esvelt), “Can large language models democratize access to dual-use biotechnology?”. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage, AI and biosecurity (research/ai-bio). The quotation (21 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-28 and again at admission on 2026-10-30, in a fresh retrieval whose SHA-256 equals the pack’s. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. The text's own limit on its evidence, kept with the record. A cross-family machine check (2026-10-30, item 96) re-read the record’s sources and found partial support; its corrections were applied at admission. No human editorial review. Status and meaning Editorial status. Not reviewed by an editor . An exploratory record that no editor has accepted. This status does not say whether a person has read any linked passage. Each evidence record above shows how it was checked.
Relation. A passage of the document meets the proposition’s criterion. The record documents what the text states, in its register (fiction and satire are labelled); it is not evidence that the proposition is true and implies no influence on or from another text.
Date. Date of the arXiv v1 submission, the expression quoted.
Record ID ab-arg-d1-soice-articulates