How can we evaluate whether frontier AI systems recognize child-safety risks before they escalate into explicit harm? Existing child safety evaluations focus on child sexual abuse material, yet many child-safety failures begin earlier: in model assistance that helps adults manipulate, impersonate, profile, or isolate minors, and in model responses that deepen children's emotional dependence on AI systems rather than redirecting them toward human support.
arXiv:2606. 29685v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: How can we evaluate whether frontier AI systems recognize child-safety risks before they escalate into explicit harm?
By Kaavya Krishna-Kumar, Elaine Lau, Vaughn Robinson, Jay Caldwell, Sheriff Issaka, Skyler Wang, Francisco Guzm\'an, Steven Kelling, Jonas Mueller
arXiv:2607. 05407v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern artificial intelligence (AI) systems present profound new risks to child safety.
By Neil Kale, Rebecca Portnoff, Pratiksha Thaker, Michael Simpson, Robertson Wang, Kevin Kuo, Chhavi Yadav, Virginia Smith
arXiv:2610.35725v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: The gap between AI capability deployment and safety assurance is structural and cannot be closed through internal evaluations alone. Analyzing docume...
By Casey M. Williams, Jennifer Victoria Scurrell
arXiv:2608. 07902v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Youth increasingly turn to AI chatbots for social and emotional support, raising concerns about how these systems respond, especially in high-stakes situations.
By Hannah Cha, Neha Shukla, Solon Barocas, Alexandra Chouldechova, Eugenia Kim, Jennifer Wortman Vaughan
The paper systematically reviews 100 empirical HCI studies on children and youth interacting with AI in various settings. Using the YAIR risk taxonomy and MIT Mitigation Taxonomy, it maps identified risks to countermeasures, finding that most risks are only matched with proposed countermeasures, few are implemented, and even fewer are evaluated. The authors highlight gaps in coverage and testing, and suggest concrete research directions to improve youth AI safety.
By Pratyasha Saha, Yaman Yu, Yang Wang
arXiv:2606. 08376v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As artificial intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly deployed across socially consequential domains, reports of AI-related harms and failures have grown in frequency and diversity.
By Leihan Zhang, Wecheng Ye, Xianlong Ma, Haochuan Liu, Yang Li, Qianyu Zhang, Jinliang Chen, Qiang Yan
arXiv:2607. 19292v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Current AI safety discourse still focuses disproportionately on visible failures, including obvious harms, dramatic misuse, and hypothetical catastrophic scenarios.
By Gjergji Kasneci, Enkelejda Kasneci
arXiv:2512.03068v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems increasingly shape consequential decisions, creating value but also potential harms for individuals, soc...
By Nicoleta Tantalaki, Sophia Vei, Athena Vakali
The paper introduces the Systemic Risk Index, an open pipeline and dashboard that aggregates evidence from 19 public AI benchmarks into four systemic‑risk categories defined by the EU GPAI Code of Practice. It evaluates 18 models using harm‑preserving perturbations and simulated deployment contexts, offering users the ability to switch between average and worst‑case aggregation and to trace each risk rating back to its benchmark evidence. The study finds that worst‑case scores can be 14 to 37 points lower than average scores, and that LLM judges agree with human graders at a level comparable to human‑human agreement.
By Jacob T. Emmerson, Phuong-Anh Nguyen-Le, Ronan Romano, Wilber Sean V. Anterola, Yann Billeter, Zhijing Jin
Claims about AI safety reach audiences well beyond the AI community, yet many rely on opaque evidence or static assessments, when supporting evidence is accessible at all. We present the Systemic Risk...
NodeSynth is a method that generates socially aligned synthetic data by combining a fine‑tuned taxonomy generator with credible sources and extracted sensitive attributes to produce queries that reflect real societal contexts and nuanced harms. In evaluations across ten open‑weight and proprietary large language models on Medical Advice and Self‑Harm tasks, NodeSynth outperformed generic synthetic baselines, structured synthetic benchmarks, and authentic human‑authored queries, inducing higher failure rates that highlight model vulnerabilities. Ablation and variance attribution studies show that the granular Level 3 taxonomic expansion and sociotechnical grounding of queries drive these failure rates, underscoring the importance of nuanced data for high‑stakes evaluation.
By Qazi Mamunur Rashid, Xuan Yang, Zhengzhe Yang, Yanzhou Pan, Erin van Liemt, Darlene Neal, Kshitij Pancholi, Jamila Smith-Loud