Claim · 2025-01-15 · publication · Stated in source · Supported

The second public draft of NIST AI 800-1 states that its Appendix D sets out additional considerations relevant to identifying, measuring and mitigating risks associated with the misuse of foundation models for the development or use of dangerous biological or chemical agents, and that its recommendations are primarily relevant for foundation model developers and deployers and for third-party evaluators working with them.

One recorded claim. The claim panel gives its qualification, the source passages with their place in each source, and how it was checked.

What it connects

NIST AI 800-1 (second public draft): Managing Misuse Risk for Dual-Use Foundation Models → states provision → Stated scope and audience of Appendix D on chemical and biological misuse risk

Where it appears

Frontier AI frameworks and law, 2023–2026 →

Claim and evidence

NIST AI 800-1 (second public draft): Managing Misuse Risk for Dual-Use Foundation Modelsstates provision ↓Stated scope and audience of Appendix D on chemical and biological misuse risk

Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editorStated in sourceSupported

Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source

Provision: Required action · provision ID nist-ai-800-1-appendix-d-scope
Subject version: Second public draft (January 2025) · Published 2025-01-15 · Effective date not established
Date: 2025-01-15 · publication

Scope and limitsRecords the appendix's own statement of its scope and audience, in a draft for comment. It is not guidance that anyone is recorded as following, and no content of the appendix beyond this scope statement is recorded. Appendix D of the draft holds domain-specific chemical and biological content; only its policy-level scope statement is cited, and no technical passage was read into this record.

The evidence 01

primary sourceSupports the claim

NIST AI 800-1 2pd (Second Public Draft): Managing Misuse Risk for Dual-Use Foundation Models (January 2025)

National Institute of Standards and Technology · 2025-01

Archived copy, captured 2025-01-15: NIST AI 800-1 2pd (Second Public Draft): Managing Misuse Risk for Dual-Use Foundation Models (January 2025)

Cite the original source

Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.

Source excerpt

“additional considerations relevant to identifying, measuring, and mitigating risks associated with the misuse of foundation models for the development or use of dangerous biological or chemical agents”

Location in source Appendix D, opening paragraph, PDF p. 36 (draft p. 31)

How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher

Machine-checked · 2026-10-30

Source details and check notes

Authors: U.S. AI Safety Institute (NIST)
Version: Retrieved on 2026-10-27 (SHA-256 362c24f9cfc1e3ba4e0756a49654eaacf3837e963fbd6ff20fe5fcefe06d3b82). The cross-family check of 2026-10-28 opened the Internet Archive capture linked here and matched the quoted wording in it, the release-period expression (decision 9); a capture shows only what the archive retrieved that day. Publisher as printed on the inspected expression: National Institute of Standards and Technology (U.S. AI Safety Institute).
Canonical address: Open the canonical source ↗
Accessed: 2026-10-27
Language: English (en)
Archive copy: Open archived copy, captured 2025-01-15: NIST AI 800-1 2pd (Second Public Draft): Managing Misuse Risk for Dual-Use Foundation Models (January 2025). An archive copy shows only what the archive retrieved on 2025-01-15. It does not prove what the page said earlier, and it can differ from the copy checked on 2026-10-27.
Attribution: U.S. AI Safety Institute (NIST), “NIST AI 800-1 2pd (Second Public Draft): Managing Misuse Risk for Dual-Use Foundation Models (January 2025)”, 2025-01.
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 (27 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 same paragraph states that the recommendations are primarily relevant for foundation model developers and deployers and for third-party evaluators that work with them. 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. An exact framework edition, or another document with an exact expression, states one provision: a capability threshold or risk level and its trigger, a required safeguard or action, a decision authority (who decides, recommends, can overrule or is informed), a stated exception, or another statement of its content, such as a licence term or a prospectus statement. The passage records what the document says, not implementation, compliance or effectiveness. Provisions with the same key align across editions of one family.

Date. Dated by the publication of the second public draft, as recorded in the dataset claim recorded separately.

Record ID ab-gov-us-nist-800-1-2pd-appendix-d