Empirical Validation of the Classification-Verification Dichotomy for AI Safety Gates
Can classifier-based safety gates maintain reliable oversight as AI systems improve over hundreds of iterations? We provide comprehensive empirical evidence that they cannot. On a self-improving neural controller (d=240), eighteen classifier configurations -- spanning MLPs, SVMs, random forests, k-NN, Bayesian classifiers, and deep networks -- all fail the dual conditions for safe self-improvement. Three safe RL baselines (CPO, Lyapunov, safety shielding) also fail. Results extend to MuJoCo benc
Record details
Published: 31 March 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Safety & alignment
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Physiological and Semantic Patterns in Medical Teams Using an Intelligent Tutoring System
arXiv · 31 March 2026
Structured Intent as a Protocol-Like Communication Layer: Cross-Model Robustness, Framework Comparison, and the Weak-Model Compensation Effect
arXiv · 31 March 2026
Hierarchical Pre-Training of Vision Encoders with Large Language Models
arXiv · 31 March 2026
M-MiniGPT4: Multilingual VLLM Alignment via Translated Data
arXiv · 31 March 2026
Neural-Assisted in-Motion Self-Heading Alignment
arXiv · 31 March 2026
RAAP: Retrieval-Augmented Affordance Prediction with Cross-Image Action Alignment
arXiv · 31 March 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (31 March 2026), “Empirical Validation of the Classification-Verification Dichotomy for AI Safety Gates,” evidence record 6540, https://ethics.ai/record/6540 (originally published by arXiv).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.