Anthropic's Responsible Scaling Policy does not specify ASL-4 requirements until ASL-3 has been reached.
Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
The evidence is the person's or their organisation's own records.
Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.
What would count as true or false
Judge as of 2024-11-11 against the text of Anthropic's Responsible Scaling Policy. True: the RSP versions in force (v1.0 of Sept 2023, and any update up to Nov 2024) say that ASL-4 commitments/requirements will be defined only later, by the time ASL-3 is reached (or before ASL-3 models are trained), and do not specify detailed ASL-4 measures. Mostly true: the RSP leaves ASL-4 largely unspecified tied to reaching ASL-3, but includes some preliminary ASL-4 content or a slightly different trigger (e.g., 'before training ASL-3 models'). Mixed: the RSP specifies ASL-4 in substantial part while leaving key elements to be defined later. Mostly false: the RSP defers ASL-4 but on a trigger unrelated to ASL-3. False: the RSP as of that date set out detailed ASL-4 requirements.
Set before the research began.
Evidence (4)
-
E1 Anthropic's Responsible Scaling Policy, Version 1.0 Anthropic · 19 September 2023 Own record
“Capabilities and warning sign evaluations defined before training ASL-3 models”
-
E2 Anthropic's Responsible Scaling Policy, October 15, 2024 Anthropic · 15 October 2024 Own record
“As noted, before deploying any model that passes the Capability Thresholds for the ASL-3 Required Safeguards, we will conduct a capability assessment against the forthcoming Capability Thresholds for the ASL-4 Required Safeguards.”
-
E3 Anthropic's Responsible Scaling Policy, October 15, 2024 Anthropic · 15 October 2024 Own record
“We will update this policy with the Capability Thresholds for the ASL-4 Required Safeguards. We are currently working on defining any further Capability Thresholds that would mandate ASL-4 Required Safeguards.”
-
E4 Anthropic is Quietly Backpedalling on its Safety Commitments LessWrong (cross-post of Obsolete, by journalist Garrison Lovely) · 23 May 2025
“While the current RSP includes high-level capability thresholds for ASL-4, it doesn't include the detailed warning sign evaluations that were part of the original commitment.”
Reasoning
The RSP v1.0 text says ASL-4 evaluations would be "defined before training ASL-3 models" (E1). That is a slightly different trigger from "until we've hit ASL-3". The October 2024 RSP calls the ASL-4 Capability Thresholds "forthcoming" and says Anthropic is "currently working on defining any further" thresholds that would require ASL-4 safeguards (E2, E3). So the RSP left ASL-4 mostly undefined, tied to the ASL-3 stage. However, the trigger wording differs slightly from the subject's description: v1.0 ties the ASL-4 evaluations to being defined before training ASL-3 models [E1], which fits mostly_true rather than true.
Cite this claim
Dario Amodei, “Anthropic's Responsible Scaling Policy does not specify ASL-4 requirements until ASL-3 has been reached.” (said 11 November 2024). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_4e56c4552328, method 0.1.0+c876030c, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_4e56c4552328
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Dario Amodei
-
Mostly true
“So we did this experiment where we basically train the model to be all the good thing, helpful, honest, harmless, friendly.”
Anthropic ran an experiment training a model to be helpful, honest, harmless and friendly.
-
Resolved true
“They're not yet at the stage where we think that there is a real and meaningful increase in the threat end to end,”
-
Resolved true
“10 to 25% referred to the chance of civilization getting substantially derailed, right?”
-
Mostly true
“this lack of understanding is essentially unprecedented in the history of technology.”
-
Mostly true
“We were able to provide a strong theoretical basis for having conviction that superposition was the right hypothesis to pursue.”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.