Choose an institution to see its records and dossier, or choose a topic.
Through year 2027 · all records, including scheduled dates 2026 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1994 1993 1992 1991 1989 1986 1985 1984 1983 1979 1966 1965 1961 1960 1955 1952 1950 1872 1863 Show Organisations and infrastructure All types Organisation Person Document Concept Infrastructure Public body Reset filters
100 people, organisations and other records · 129 relationships · 34 claims about a valueEverything recorded up to the chosen year, whether or not still in effect · Undated records included
Claim and evidence Close ×
Under fostering consensus on loss-of-control risk, the AI Safety Governance Framework 2.0 states that developers regularly test whether a model may bring potential technical loss-of-control risk. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Provision Required action · provision ID loss-of-control-testing Subject version 2.0 · Published 2025-09-15 · Effective date not established Date 2025-09-15 · publication Scope and limits What version 2.0 says. The sentence has no modal verb; it is recorded as a stated measure, not as an obligation on any named developer, and no test protocol or frequency is given.
The evidence 01 primary source Supports the claim
人工智能安全治理框架2.0 ↗ 全国网络安全标准化技术委员会 (hosted by the Cyberspace Administration of China, cac.gov.cn) · 2025-09 · In Simplified Chinese (zh-Hans)
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 “开发者定期进行测试，判断模型是否可能带来潜在技术失控风险” Location in source §5.11 增进协同应对人工智能失控风险的共识
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-27
Source details and check notes Authors 全国网络安全标准化技术委员会; 国家计算机网络应急技术处理协调中心 Version Dated document, retrieved on 2026-10-27 (SHA-256 50735b9ca01bff746169fa58e554abb97b4e62c27d4c97afd64f18ff83bba705) directly from the publisher. Version: 1759653474200838.pdf. Bilingual PDF (Chinese text followed by the publisher’s English text) linked from the CAC news item of 15 September 2025. Quotes are from the Chinese text, transcribed as printed: the text layer contains control characters (U+0001) and compatibility forms (Kangxi radicals, ⻛ for 风, ⻅ for 见), which are normalised in the quotations. No copy on tc260.org.cn was located. English title (machine translation): “AI Safety Governance Framework 2.0”. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-27 Language Simplified Chinese (zh-Hans) Attribution 全国网络安全标准化技术委员会, 国家计算机网络应急技术处理协调中心, “人工智能安全治理框架2.0”, 2025-09. 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, Chinese frontier-AI institutions, second collection (research/china-labs-2). Transcribed as printed. The passage matched the retrieved text on 2026-10-27 and again in a fresh retrieval the same day, read directly from the publisher; in the PDF’s text layer it contains control characters (U+0001) and compatibility forms (Kangxi radicals, ⻛ for 风, ⻅ for 见), which the candidate pack marked with ellipses. The cross-family check found that those ellipses do not reproduce the printed text (K047), so the quotation was re-extracted at admission, without them and with the forms normalised, from a direct retrieval of the PDF whose SHA-256 equals the pack’s. English machine translation, not verified by a person: “developers regularly conduct tests to judge whether a model may bring potential risks of technical loss of control”. 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 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), or a stated exception. The quoted text records what the edition says, not implementation, compliance or effectiveness. Provisions with the same key align across editions of one family.
Date. Release date of the cited edition; the provision's own effect or application date is not stated.
Record ID c2-governance-tc260-asgf-v2-loss-of-control-testing