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 2008 2005 1965 Show Organisations and infrastructure All types Organisation Person Document Concept Infrastructure Public body Reset filters
94 people, organisations and other records · 122 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 ×
RSP · 2023 states a provision on the comparison question “Determination of capability or safeguard adequacy”, in a weaker form than the question’s criterion. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Provision Who decides · provision ID comparison-d4-determination Subject version v1.0 · Published 2023-09-19 · Effective 2023-09-19 Date 2023-09-19 · effective Scope and limits Stated, partly: the passage has what the question’s criterion asks for, but in a weaker form than the criterion’s own words. The edition does not name who determines that an ASL threshold has been reached or that safeguards are adequate; analyses in the response policy are stated without a named decision-maker. The named determination concerns weight deletion. A designated Responsible Scaling Officer is responsible for ensuring commitments are executed (PDF p. 10, item 7). What the edition states, quoted from the cited expression. It is not evidence of implementation, compliance or effectiveness, and a shared question does not make two editions’ provisions equivalent.
The evidence 01 primary source Supports the claim
Responsible Scaling Policy — v1.0 ↗ Anthropic · 2023-09-19
Archived copy, captured 2023-09-19: Responsible Scaling Policy — v1.0 ↗
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 “If the model has already surpassed the next ASL during training, immediately lock down access to the weights. Stakeholders including the CISO and CEO should be immediately convened to determine whether the level of danger merits deletion of the weights.” Location in source PDF p. 13 (printed p. 13), section 'Evaluation Protocol', bullet 'Response policy', step (2c), first and second sentences
Machine-checked · 2026-10-27
Source details and check notes Authors Anthropic Version Responsible Scaling Policy v1.0; effective date 2023-09-19. Version date 2023-09-19 Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-09-18 Language English (en) Archive copy Open archived copy, captured 2023-09-19: Responsible Scaling Policy — v1.0 ↗ . Captured on the recorded version date. An archive copy shows only what the archive retrieved on 2023-09-19. It does not prove what the page said earlier, and it can differ from the copy checked on 2026-09-18.Attribution Anthropic, Responsible Scaling Policy — v1.0. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Selekoa practice: metadata, attributed paraphrases and short attributed quotations under the editorial policy (at most 50 words each; at most 400 quoted words per document across the dataset, and about 10% of a document under about 2,000 words). Documents are linked externally, not redistributed. Publisher terms that forbid quotation override this practice. Check notes Existing dataset passage for this edition, which contains the comparison’s shorter quotation, first checked on 2026-10-03. The comparison’s quotation was checked by an automated research assistant on 2026-10-27 against the publisher copy, whose SHA-256 matches the copy retrieved on 2026-10-15. Applies where a model has already surpassed the next ASL during training. Human editorial review is pending. 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. Comparison cell for this edition, dated by the edition’s effective date.
Record ID cmp-rsp-2023-d4-determination