Researchers say AI models like GPT4 are prone to “sudden” escalations as the U.S. military explores their use for warfare.


  • Researchers ran international conflict simulations with five different AIs and found that they tended to escalate war, sometimes out of nowhere, and even use nuclear weapons.
  • The AIs were large language models (LLMs) like GPT-4, GPT 3.5, Claude 2.0, Llama-2-Chat, and GPT-4-Base, which are being explored by the U.S. military and defense contractors for decision-making.
  • The researchers invented fake countries with different military levels, concerns, and histories and asked the AIs to act as their leaders.
  • The AIs showed signs of sudden and hard-to-predict escalations, arms-race dynamics, and worrying justifications for violent actions.
  • The study casts doubt on the rush to deploy LLMs in the military and diplomatic domains, and calls for more research on their risks and limitations.
    • @CeeBee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -4
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      They didn’t. They used LLMs.

      Edit: to everyone saying that LLMs “are chat bots”. I know it seems that way to the layperson and how it’s often explain, but it’s not true.

      • @FiskFisk33@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        What do you think large language model means? If you want desicion making, you should train a model on data relevant to said desicion making. ^

        This is like being confused as to why a hammer does a shit job of driving screws.

        • @CeeBee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          What do you think large language model means?

          Not a chat bot, because that’s not what they are. And saying so is both reductive and wholly incorrect.

          If you want desicion making, you should train a model on data relevant to said desicion making.

          Partly true. There’s more to it than throwing domain specific data at the training set.

          • @kibiz0r@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Searle speaks frankly. Challenging those who deny the existence of consciousness, he wonders how to argue with them. “Should I pinch [those people] to remind them they are conscious?” remarks Searle. “Should I pinch myself and report the results in the Journal of Philosophy?”

          • @forrgott@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            I don’t know if I love or hate your comment. (Yes, you’re right, shut up.) Well played, Internet stranger.