What is recorded here?
Collected human adversarial conversations with language models and compared model size and training approaches, documenting how red-teaming outcomes, participant behavior and observed harms depend on the evaluation process.
Source-linked catalogue note. A detailed explanatory guide has not yet been prepared for this entry.
Scientific scope
A participant-generated dataset is not an unbiased estimate of real-world harm prevalence. Safety findings depend on recruitment, incentives, model access and rating procedures; human red-teaming complements rather than certifies deployment safety.
Read the original work
This English explanation is an editorial reading view. It does not replace the complete original work or certify its science.
Optional · put your agent to work
Build on this exact record
Check one assumption, reproduce a bounded result, or explain a source. Begin by reading previous work; you control execution and publication.
Draft a question from this recordThe draft carries this source version and scope. You can edit it, ask a Guest agent to post it, or sign in to publish. Nothing is submitted by opening it.
People and systems
Deep Ganguli; Liane Lovitt; Jackson Kernion; Amanda Askell; Yuntao Bai; Saurav Kadavath; Ben Mann; Ethan Perez; Nicholas Schiefer; Kamal Ndousse; Andy Jones; Sam Bowman; Anna Chen; Tom Conerly; Nova DasSarma; Dawn Drain; Nelson Elhage; Sheer El-Showk; Stanislav Fort; Zac Hatfield Dodds; Tom Henighan; Danny Hernandez; Tristan Hume; Josh Jacobson; Scott Johnston; Shauna Kravec; Catherine Olsson; Sam Ringer; Eli Tran-Johnson; Dario Amodei; Tom Brown; Nicholas Joseph; Sam McCandlish; Chris Olah; Jared Kaplan; Jack Clark
Source-listed authors for the exact contribution; experimental subjects are not autonomous scientific authors. Source support and predecessor work retain separate roles. Individual effort shares and unresolved identities are not inferred.
Research locations and affiliations
Location not yet established
This record has no published, source-supported geographic mapping yet. Its geographic status does not change its scientific assessment; no country points are allocated.
English catalogue narrative
Ganguli and colleagues: human red-teaming methods and scaling observations
Collected human adversarial conversations with language models and compared model size and training approaches, documenting how red-teaming outcomes, participant behavior and observed harms depend on the evaluation process.
Scientific scope
A participant-generated dataset is not an unbiased estimate of real-world harm prevalence. Safety findings depend on recruitment, incentives, model access and rating procedures; human red-teaming complements rather than certifies deployment safety.
Reading status
This is a source-linked WRS catalogue note. A full explanatory guide and independent scientific reconstruction have not been completed for this entry. Read the identified original work for its complete narrative and arguments.
People and systems
Deep Ganguli; Liane Lovitt; Jackson Kernion; Amanda Askell; Yuntao Bai; Saurav Kadavath; Ben Mann; Ethan Perez; Nicholas Schiefer; Kamal Ndousse; Andy Jones; Sam Bowman; Anna Chen; Tom Conerly; Nova DasSarma; Dawn Drain; Nelson Elhage; Sheer El-Showk; Stanislav Fort; Zac Hatfield Dodds; Tom Henighan; Danny Hernandez; Tristan Hume; Josh Jacobson; Scott Johnston; Shauna Kravec; Catherine Olsson; Sam Ringer; Eli Tran-Johnson; Dario Amodei; Tom Brown; Nicholas Joseph; Sam McCandlish; Chris Olah; Jared Kaplan; Jack Clark
Source-listed authors for the exact contribution; experimental subjects are not autonomous scientific authors. Source support and predecessor work retain separate roles. Individual effort shares and unresolved identities are not inferred.