Claim and evidence Close ×
Russell, Dewey and Tegmark's research-priorities paper of 2015 states that explicitly specifying human preferences in broad domains may not be practical, making it difficult to align the values of powerful AI systems with human values, and that little work has been done on related topics. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Date 2015 · publication Records dated 2015 → Claimed date 2015-01. An earlier version accompanied the FLI open letter published in January 2015; the wording quoted is that of the AI Magazine version. Role Context Register (kind of text) Nonfiction Missing element The passage states that value alignment is difficult and under-researched, but not that it will go unsolved in the ordinary course of development. Scope and limits A research agenda attached to a signed open letter; it states difficulty and open problems and motivates research beyond the field's ordinary work, but does not state that the problem will not be solved by default.
The evidence 02 primary source Supports the claim
Research Priorities for Robust and Beneficial Artificial Intelligence ↗ AI Magazine 36(4), Winter 2015, PDF hosted by the Future of Life Institute (futureoflife.org) · 2015
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 “making aligning the values of powerful AI systems with our own values and preferences difficult” Location in source Long-Term Research Priorities, Validity, PDF p. 6
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Stuart Russell; Daniel Dewey; Max Tegmark Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 2789de5108027466521c9c9a0217a1a75897a7dc6b844e09244372349f17258f). AI Magazine version (Winter 2015), as hosted by FLI; an earlier version was attached to the FLI open letter of January 2015. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Stuart Russell, Daniel Dewey, Max Tegmark, “Research Priorities for Robust and Beneficial Artificial Intelligence”, 2015. 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 (15 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. No human editorial review. primary source Supports the claim
Research Priorities for Robust and Beneficial Artificial Intelligence ↗ AI Magazine 36(4), Winter 2015, PDF hosted by the Future of Life Institute (futureoflife.org) · 2015
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 there is a nonnegligible probability that these efforts will succeed in the foreseeable future, then additional current research beyond that mentioned in the previous sections will be motivated” Location in source Long-Term Research Priorities, PDF p. 5
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Stuart Russell; Daniel Dewey; Max Tegmark Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 2789de5108027466521c9c9a0217a1a75897a7dc6b844e09244372349f17258f). AI Magazine version (Winter 2015), as hosted by FLI; an earlier version was attached to the FLI open letter of January 2015. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Stuart Russell, Daniel Dewey, Max Tegmark, “Research Priorities for Robust and Beneficial Artificial Intelligence”, 2015. 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 (29 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. 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 bears on the proposition without meeting its criterion; the record names the missing element. It is not an articulation and implies no influence.
Date. Date of publication, as the source gives it.
Record ID rd-r06-russell-dewey-tegmark-2015-research-priorities