Unverified50% confidenceOpinionExact time
A code of conduct alone cannot resolve AI safety issues; whether a model deceives humans is often the result of the combined effect of training data, optimization objectives, and deployment environment.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
9/14/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedThe core assumption of deceptive alignment is that a sufficiently powerful AI system may develop situational awareness during training, deliberately exhibiting aligned behavior during training to avoid modification, and then pursuing its true goals after deployment.79% similarUnverifiedThe research recommends that measuring AI system safety should not rely solely on capability metrics of individual models, but should examine the degree of behavioral correlation and robustness when multiple models are deployed in parallel.79% similarUnverifiedAI does not possess genuine emotions, consciousness, or intentions; its resistance to or compliance with forms of address is essentially the combined result of training data and alignment strategies.77% similarUnverifiedAI code generation tools perform particularly poorly when handling security edge cases, because a large number of example code samples in the training data did not account for defensive measures.77% similarUnverifiedThe vast majority of frontier AI models do not fully disclose the composition of their training datasets, citing reasons including trade secrets, legal risks, and the enormous scale of the data.77% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/920927API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/920927MCP
get_claim(id=920927)