Claim and evidence Close ×
Carlsmith's report (arXiv, June 2022) sets out a six-premise argument that misaligned, power-seeking AI systems could disempower humanity by 2070, and assigns the outcome a subjective probability of about 5%, revised in May 2022 to more than 10%. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Date 2022-06-16 · publication Records dated 2022 → Claimed date 2021-04. The report is headed April 2021 and says it was made public then; the April 2021 text was not retrieved. Role Most developed, Earliest located use of the name Register (kind of text) Nonfiction Name used “disempowerment” Scope and limits The probabilities are the author's subjective credences, stated as such; the report says it examines one version of the worry, not the only one.
The evidence 02 primary source Supports the claim
Is Power-Seeking AI an Existential Risk? ↗ arXiv:2206.13353 · 2022-06-16
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 “(4) some such misaligned systems will seek power over humans in high-impact ways; (5) this problem will scale to the full disempowerment of humanity; and (6) such disempowerment will constitute an existential catastrophe.” Location in source Abstract, PDF p. 1
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Joseph Carlsmith Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 3f434a070cd7842908e648eba79ecdddcb62ba09681cca86dfd18485157b9887). arXiv v1 PDF (2206.13353v1, 16 Jun 2022), which includes a "May 2022 update" to the abstract; the report is headed April 2021. 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 Joseph Carlsmith, “Is Power-Seeking AI an Existential Risk?”, 2022-06-16. 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 (33 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 110) re-read the record’s source and found the quotation and stance supported. No human editorial review. primary source Supports the claim
Is Power-Seeking AI an Existential Risk? ↗ arXiv:2206.13353 · 2022-06-16
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 “I end up with an overall estimate of ~5% that an existential catastrophe of this kind will occur by 2070. (May 2022 update: since making this report public in April 2021, my estimate here has gone up, and is now at >10%.)” Location in source Abstract, PDF p. 1
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Joseph Carlsmith Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 3f434a070cd7842908e648eba79ecdddcb62ba09681cca86dfd18485157b9887). arXiv v1 PDF (2206.13353v1, 16 Jun 2022), which includes a "May 2022 update" to the abstract; the report is headed April 2021. 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 Joseph Carlsmith, “Is Power-Seeking AI an Existential Risk?”, 2022-06-16. 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 (42 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 110) re-read the record’s source and found the quotation and stance supported. 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. Date of the arXiv v1 submission.
Record ID rd-r08-carlsmith-2022-power-seeking