Feb 2, 2026

AI Safety Threshold Tracker

Revathi Prasad

AI Safety Threshold Tracker

An interactive dashboard that connects AI capability benchmarks to governance-defined thresholds. The tracker aggregates verified data from third-party evaluations (METR, SWE-Bench, WMDP) and company RSP disclosures (Anthropic ASL classifications, CBRN uplift scores), mapping them to thresholds derived from international frameworks including IDAIS Red Lines, EU AI Act, and Seoul Summit commitments.

Key features:

1. User-configurable thresholds with transparent justification labeling (distinguishing data-driven thresholds from interpretations)

2. 4 active capability metrics, 2 categorical RSP metrics, 5 inactive metrics awaiting data

3. Real-time tracking of frontier model capabilities against policy-relevant thresholds

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

This is a practical project that fills a real gap: turning vague “threshold” talk into something you can actually track. The framing is sensible and the dashboard is clear.

The main limitation is that the threshold mappings are still somewhat heuristic. This is more “good governance plumbing” than a new safety method. The impact depends on adoption.

To level up, I’d want: backtesting (“would this have changed decisions historically?”), uncertainty / missing-data handling, and a clean process for updating thresholds without Goodharting.

A useful tool with a simple idea. Only a few models has been tested which is reasonable given the time constrains.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) AI Safety Threshold Tracker

},

author={

Revathi Prasad

},

date={

2/2/26

},

organization={Apart Research},

note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

View All

View All

Feb 2, 2026

Prototyping an Embedded Off-Switch for AI Compute

This project prototypes an embedded off-switch for AI accelerators. The security block requires periodic cryptographic authorization to operate: the chip generates a nonce, an external authority signs it, and the chip verifies the signature before granting time-limited permission. Without valid authorization, outputs are gated to zero. The design was implemented in HardCaml and validated in simulation.

Read More

Feb 2, 2026

Fingerprinting All AI Cluster I/O Without Mutually Trusted Processors

We design and simulate a "border patrol" device for generating cryptographic evidence of data traffic entering and leaving an AI cluster, while eliminating the specific analog and steganographic side-channels that post-hoc verification can not close. The device eliminates the need for any mutually trusted logic, while still meeting the security needs of the prover and verifier.

Read More

Feb 2, 2026

Modelling the impact of verification in cross-border AI training projects

This paper develops a stylized game-theoretic model of cross-border AI training projects in which multiple states jointly train frontier models while retaining national control over compute resources. We focus on decentralized coordination regimes, where actors publicly pledge compute contributions but privately choose actual delivery, creating incentives to free-ride on a shared public good. To address this, the model introduces explicit verification mechanisms, represented as a continuous monitoring intensity that improves the precision of noisy signals about each actor's true compute contribution. Our findings suggest that policymakers designing international AI governance institutions face a commitment problem: half-measures in verification are counterproductive, and effective regimes require either accepting some free-riding or investing substantially in monitoring infrastructure.

Read More

This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.
This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.