Scaling human oversight of AI systems for tasks that are difficult to evaluate.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at OpenAI Blog.
arXiv:2510. 26518v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Human feedback is critical for aligning AI systems to human values.
AI agents are increasingly autonomous, posing significant risks that current designs hinder effective human oversight. The paper argues that oversight is degraded by both design choices and the cognitive decline of users who rely heavily on automation. It calls for prioritizing human cognitive needs in AI agent development, proposing design affordances and protocols to maintain critical judgment and counter skill atrophy.
arXiv:2607. 16530v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As generative AI is increasingly applied to automate multi-step and high-stake workflows, human judgment and involvement remain essential for ensuring the quality of AI-generated outputs.
arXiv:2608. 13577v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This position paper argues that the dominant paradigm of AI evaluation (which focuses on superhuman autonomous performance and so implicitly targets the goal of replacing humans) is guiding AI development in the wrong direction.
arXiv:2502. 20502v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) have yielded powerful computational models that, by learning from vast amounts of human-generated data, are increasingly posited as approximate models of human cognition.
We trained “critique-writing” models to describe flaws in summaries. Human evaluators find flaws in summaries much more often when shown our model’s critiques.