← Back

Stuart Russell

individualCredibility: 73%

Why this score? UC Berkeley CS professor and co-author of the standard AI textbook; long-standing AI-safety advocate and FLI pause-letter signatory. High scholarly credibility; advocacy stance noted.

Tracked Statements (2)

While there is good work being done on AI safety in the industry, the capabilities race has become more extreme. Companies have backed away from earlier commitments to release new systems only with safety measures appropriate for their capability levels; now, they’re planning to release them even if it’s demonstrably unsafe to do so.±

Context: The first clause is supported by the documented record: the Index Russell reviewed finds Anthropic, OpenAI, Google DeepMind and Meta have all weakened or voided unilateral-pause pledges, and this page’s own timeline records OpenAI dissolving its Superalignment team a year after pledging 20% of compute to it, and the US revoking Executive Order 14110 and renaming its AI Safety Institute. The second clause — that companies are “planning to release them even if it’s demonstrably unsafe to do so” — characterises intent, is not established by the Index’s own findings, and cannot be verified from any source in this cycle. Recorded as mixed: a supported factual claim bundled with an unverifiable one. Russell is a member of the Index’s review panel, not an independent commentator on it.

Therefore, we call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4.?

Context: The Future of Life Institute’s ‘Pause Giant AI Experiments’ open letter, signed by Musk, Bengio, Russell, Wozniak and thousands of others. As a matter of record no lab paused — training of GPT-4-class and more capable models continued and accelerated through 2023–2026 — and nineteen past AAAI presidents published a counter-letter on 5 April 2023 urging ‘a constructive, collaborative, and scientific approach’ instead. But the letter is a normative call to action and a risk judgement, not a falsifiable factual prediction, so it is recorded rather than scored against its signatories.