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 ×
FSF v3.0 states that, among its example conditions for deeming a model that has reached a misuse CCL to pose an acceptable level of risk, the security condition is met if security mitigations reach the recommended security level or if Google DeepMind otherwise assesses the level of security applied to be adequate, e.g. if the mitigations match or exceed the security applied to other models with similar capabilities or risk profiles, or if it assesses that the benefits of open release of the model weights outweigh the risks. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Provision Exception · provision ID fsf-alternative-security-adequacy Subject version v3.0 · Published 2025-09-22 · Effective date not established Date 2025-09-22 · publication Scope and limits What the edition states, quoted from the cited expression. It is not evidence of implementation, compliance or effectiveness. One of several example conditions for risk acceptance; the quote starts at its second alternative.
The evidence 01 primary source Supports the claim
Frontier Safety Framework — v3.0 ↗ Google DeepMind · 2025-09-22
Archived copy, captured 2025-09-22: Frontier Safety Framework — v3.0 ↗
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 “or we otherwise assess that the level of security applied is adequate, e.g. if they match or exceed the level of security applied to other models with similar capabilities or risk profiles, or we assess that the benefits of the open release of model weights outweigh the risks.” Location in source PDF p. 7 (printed p. 7), §1.6 Summary of Risk Acceptance Criteria, misuse-CCL bullet (begins PDF p. 6), second sub-bullet, from “or we otherwise assess”
Machine-checked · 2026-10-03
Source details and check notes Authors Google DeepMind Version Frontier Safety Framework v3.0; publication date 2025-09-22. Version date 2025-09-22 Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-09-18 Language English (en) Archive copy Open archived copy, captured 2025-09-22: Frontier Safety Framework — v3.0 ↗ . Captured on the recorded version date. An archive copy shows only what the archive retrieved on 2025-09-22. It does not prove what the page said earlier, and it can differ from the copy checked on 2026-09-18.Attribution Google DeepMind, Frontier Safety Framework — v3.0. 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 Verbatim excerpt checked by an automated research assistant on 2026-10-03 against the inspected PDF, byte-identical to the Internet Archive capture of 2025-09-22. Extraction note: Quote starts mid-sentence at the second alternative; the sub-bullet opens with security mitigations reaching the recommended security level. The ML R&D bullet on the same page repeats this wording. 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. Provision as stated in this edition, dated by the edition’s publication date.
Record ID prov-fsf-v3-0-alternative-security-adequacy