Claim and evidence Close ×
Hadshar's review of October 2023 finds the evidence for existential risk from misaligned power-seeking concerning but inconclusive, and states that being unable to rule the risk out confidently is cause for serious concern. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Date 2023-10-27 · publication Records dated 2023 → Role Contesting Register (kind of text) Nonfiction Engagement Engages a premise. It disputes the premise that the absence of conclusive evidence justifies setting the risk aside. Scope and limits A review of conceptual and empirical evidence; it does not claim to demonstrate the risk. Added on the cross-family check's proposal to balance the proposition's records.
The evidence 02 primary source Supports the claim
A Review of the Evidence for Existential Risk from AI via Misaligned Power-Seeking ↗ arXiv (2310.18244v1) · 2023-10-27
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 “The fact that we cannot confidently rule out existential risk from AI via misaligned power-seeking is cause for serious concern.” 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 Rose Hadshar Version arXiv version 1, stamped 27 October 2023. Retrieved at admission on 2026-10-31 (SHA-256 324e539b87111fdc5c415a9283cda298e3bc95a83f174721938aebbd869ec8c8). Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-31 Language English (en) Attribution Rose Hadshar, “A Review of the Evidence for Existential Risk from AI via Misaligned Power-Seeking”, 2023-10-27. 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 Added at the admission of the risk-debate pack (research/risk-debate). The quotation (20 words) matched a fresh retrieval of 2026-10-31 (SHA-256 324e539b87111fdc5c415a9283cda298e3bc95a83f174721938aebbd869ec8c8). Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms. The cross-family check of 2026-10-31 proposed the record and read this passage. No human editorial review. primary source Supports the claim
A Review of the Evidence for Existential Risk from AI via Misaligned Power-Seeking ↗ arXiv (2310.18244v1) · 2023-10-27
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 “We find that the current state of the evidence for existential risk from misaligned power-seeking is concerning but inconclusive.” Location in source Section 1, Introduction, PDF p. 2
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Rose Hadshar Version arXiv version 1, stamped 27 October 2023. Retrieved at admission on 2026-10-31 (SHA-256 324e539b87111fdc5c415a9283cda298e3bc95a83f174721938aebbd869ec8c8). Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-31 Language English (en) Attribution Rose Hadshar, “A Review of the Evidence for Existential Risk from AI via Misaligned Power-Seeking”, 2023-10-27. 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 Added at the admission of the risk-debate pack (research/risk-debate). The quotation (19 words) matched a fresh retrieval of 2026-10-31 (SHA-256 324e539b87111fdc5c415a9283cda298e3bc95a83f174721938aebbd869ec8c8). Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms. Added at admission for the review's own summary of its finding; not part of the cross-family check's selection. 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 disputes the proposition or a premise it depends on. The record documents the text’s position, not who is right.
Date. Date of the arXiv v1 submission.
Record ID rd-r11-hadshar-2023-evidence-review