Claim and evidence Close ×
Benson-Tilsen and Soares's paper, dated here by its file of November 2015, gives a formal model in which it states that Omohundro's thesis holds, and states that agents in the model will not leave humans alone unless their utility function values human-occupied regions intrinsically. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Date 2015-11 · publication Records dated 2015 → Role Articulation Register (kind of text) Nonfiction Scope and limits A result within the paper's model, which it describes as not intended to be surprising; not evidence about any built system. The date rests on file metadata only.
The evidence 02 primary source Supports the claim
Formalizing Convergent Instrumental Goals ↗ Machine Intelligence Research Institute (intelligence.org) · 2015-11
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 “In section 4 we will demonstrate that Omohundro’s thesis does in fact hold in our setting.” Location in source Section 1, PDF p. 2
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Tsvi Benson-Tilsen; Nate Soares Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 738ab7cfac016791de6ae78dd16ec8c68f4a0bc727b782d9087bb6652ed781f1). MIRI PDF, undated; PDF metadata created 2015-11-24; the abstract column is partly lost in the text layer; any workshop-proceedings version was not compared. The cross-family check retrieved it again on 2026-10-31, with the same bytes. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Tsvi Benson-Tilsen, Nate Soares, “Formalizing Convergent Instrumental Goals”, 2015-11. 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, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (16 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. A cross-family machine check (2026-10-31, item 38) answered the record’s question blind and agreed with its stance. No human editorial review. primary source Supports the claim
Formalizing Convergent Instrumental Goals ↗ Machine Intelligence Research Institute (intelligence.org) · 2015-11
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 model further predicts that agents will not in fact “leave humans alone” unless their utility function places intrinsic utility on the state of human-occupied regions” Location in source Section 2, PDF p. 3
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Tsvi Benson-Tilsen; Nate Soares Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 738ab7cfac016791de6ae78dd16ec8c68f4a0bc727b782d9087bb6652ed781f1). MIRI PDF, undated; PDF metadata created 2015-11-24; the abstract column is partly lost in the text layer; any workshop-proceedings version was not compared. The cross-family check retrieved it again on 2026-10-31, with the same bytes. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Tsvi Benson-Tilsen, Nate Soares, “Formalizing Convergent Instrumental Goals”, 2015-11. 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, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (26 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. A cross-family machine check (2026-10-31, item 38) answered the record’s question blind and agreed with its stance. 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. The PDF prints no date; dated by its PDF metadata (created 24 November 2015) on the MIRI copy read. Later citations give 2016 (an AAAI workshop); not verified here.
Record ID rd-r02-benson-tilsen-soares-2015-formalizing-convergent-goals