company profile

Verisight

AI safety and evaluation tooling for production systems.

26Connections
9Papers
0Models
3Repos
13News

Papers · 9

Overview of Risk Assessment and Management for Intelligent Systems under the AI Act and Beyond

The society and emerging risk-based regulatory frameworks for AI underscore the need for rigorous risk assessment to ensure safe and reliable AI systems. In response to this imperative, this paper presents an overview of AI risk assessment (identification and analysis) and management methodologies. It begins by reviewing the worldwide regulatory landscape that drives the need for systematic AI risk assessment. Then we characterize the spectrum of AI-related risks identified in the literature, from technical failures to ethical and social impacts. Subsequently, it reviews key risk assessment me

A Tutorial on Autonomous Fault-Tolerant Control Using Knowledge-Grounded LLM Agents

Fault recovery in process plants still relies heavily on plant operators, especially when faults fall outside predefined supervisory logic. Operators interpret alarms, procedures, P\&IDs, interlocks, and process trends, then decide how to move the plant to a safe operating mode without triggering a shutdown. This paper examines how Large Language Model (LLM) agents can support such recovery decisions. The proposed framework treats the LLM as a constrained supervisory planner. It uses plant-specific knowledge to propose recovery actions, and every proposal is checked by an external validator (s

Adversarial Pragmatics for AI Safety Evaluation: A Benchmark for Instruction Conflict, Embedded Commands, and Policy Ambiguity

Safety evaluations for language models increasingly depend on judgments about ambiguous natural-language behaviour: whether a model has followed an instruction, refused appropriately, complied with a policy, resisted an embedded command, or misreported progress in an agentic task. Existing benchmarks often compress these distinctions into pass/fail labels, obscuring whether failures arise from capability limits, policy ambiguity, instruction conflict, scaffold failure, or unstable evaluator judgments. This paper introduces adversarial pragmatics as a benchmark and annotation protocol for eva

EvalSafetyGap: A Hybrid Survey and Conceptual Framework for LLM Evaluation-Safety Failures

LLM evaluation and AI safety face a shared measurement problem: benchmark scores, reward-model signals, and reported safety metrics can improve while the latent properties they are meant to represent remain difficult to verify. This paper combines a hybrid survey - a systematic search paired with narrative synthesis and separately tracked grey evidence - with a conceptual framework and a structured ten-model audit. The synthesis spans eight evidence streams: benchmark validity, dynamic evaluation, LLM-as-judge reliability, safety evaluation, jailbreak/refusal robustness, reward hacking, mechan

The Eticas AI Risk Taxonomy: Open Infrastructure for Operationalizing AI Audits

The rapid deployment of AI systems across high-stakes domains has created urgent demand for standardized evaluation, yet the field remains fragmented across competing risk taxonomies that catalog risks without showing how an audit is executed. At least 74 AI risk taxonomies exist, and almost all stop at the catalog. The hard part of auditing is not naming a risk but operationalizing it: turning it into a test run against a real system, a measured value, a calibrated severity, and a defensible grade. This paper leads with that bridge. We present the operationalization layer Eticas has built and

Online Safety Monitoring for LLMs

Despite alignment training, LLMs remain prone to generating unsafe outputs at deployment time. Monitoring outputs online and raising an alarm when safety can no longer be assumed is therefore critical. We study a simple real-time monitor that turns a verifier signal from an external model into an alarm decision by thresholding, with the threshold calibrated via risk control. In experiments on mathematical reasoning and red teaming datasets, we show that this simple design is competitive with more advanced monitors based on sequential hypothesis testing.

A Multi-Dataset Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Agents in Microservice Failure Diagnosis

LLM-based agents are reshaping microservice operations into AgentOps, where benchmarks are key to evaluating failure diagnosis over multimodal observability data. However, existing benchmarks remain largely outcome-oriented: they score only the final answer and fail to assess the systematic reasoning process in failure diagnosis. We address this gap by introducing two large-scale datasets (AIOps2025 and RCA100) under a reasoning-process evaluation paradigm that assesses agentic diagnostic capability along three dimensions: Localization (where the fault occurs), Identification (what type of fau

The safety failures we are not instrumenting: a perspective on hidden safety-critical challenges in modern AI systems

Current AI safety discourse still focuses disproportionately on visible failures, including obvious harms, dramatic misuse, and hypothetical catastrophic scenarios. That focus is incomplete. In deployed systems, many of the most consequential failures are quieter: plausible rather than spectacular, distributed across components rather than localized in a single output, and normalized by workflows before they are recognized as hazards. We argue that a central safety challenge in modern AI systems is increasingly not only whether a model emits a harmful response, but whether the broader socio-te

News · 13

the trust layer is the real product

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>users show up to your AI product already burned. not by you, by the last three tools that were confidently wrong at the worst possible moment. that damage transfers.</p> <p>we learned this the hard way. product demoed great, retention was rough. users tried it once, got something 80% right, never came back. not because 80% isn't useful, because they couldn't tell which 20% was wrong.</p> <p>the fix wasn't better AI. it was being honest about where the AI stops a

What does "Safe AI" look like? [D]

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>&#x200b;</p> <p>For open-weight LLMs, how practical is it to study defenses against post-release fine-tuning that weakens refusal or safety behavior?</p> <p>I've been seeing “uncensored” or “heretic” variants of new models appear very quickly after release, which raises a question I’m curious about: is fine-tuning resistance a meaningful safety goal for open-weight releases, or is it too narrow because determined users can always modify weights, switch models, o

Nemotron 3.5 Content Safety: Customizable Multimodal Safety for Global Enterprise AI

Teaching AI to run with the turbines

Artificial intelligence may have captured the public imagination through chatbots and image generators, but some of its most consequential use cases are unfolding far from consumer-facing tools. In industries where physical infrastructure, operational continuity, and safety are paramount, AI is becoming a core operating layer. With its sprawling industrial systems and constant stream of operational&#8230;

Safety and alignment in an era of long-horizon models

OpenAI shares lessons from deploying long-running AI models, highlighting new safety risks, observed failures, and improved safeguards through iterative deployment.

Predicting model behavior before release by simulating deployment

OpenAI introduces Deployment Simulation, a method to predict AI model behavior before deployment using real conversation data to improve safety and evaluation accuracy.

Investing in multi-agent AI safety research

Google DeepMind and partners announce a $10M funding call for multi-agent safety research.

Securing the future of AI agents

Securing internal systems with an AI Control Roadmap, combining traditional safeguards and real-time monitoring.