Sep 15, 2025

Arbiter: Automated Review of Bio-AI Tools for Emerging Risk

Ryan Teo, Shrestha Rath

The rapid advancement of AI-enabled biological tools presents significantbiosecurity and AI safety challenges, necessitating scalable and balancedassessments. Building on the Global Risk Index (GRI) for AI-enabled BiologicalTools report's foundational framework, this work introduces Arbiter, anautomated pipeline designed to overcome the GRI's resource-intensive manualanalysis. Arbiter employs a multi-stage LLM-driven process to analyze scientificliterature, systematically evaluating AI-Bio tools for misuse risks and, notably,their potential benefits. This includes assessing economic impact, nationalcompetitiveness, and crisis response capabilities, providing policymakers with thecomprehensive, balanced insights required for informed decision-making. A pilotexecution demonstrated Arbiter's ability to efficiently monitor emerging tools,highlight areas for prompt and model refinement, and support the development offuture decision-support frameworks. Arbiter's modular and extensible designempowers users to tailor analyses, ensuring continuous, scalable, and adaptableoversight in this dynamic field.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

Excellent idea to expand the suggestions in the GRI report, and Arbiter is a promising prototype: modular, flexible, well-documented, and already working as a MVP. It’s also interesting that the project considers not only risks but also the potential benefits of bio-AI tools.

The main weakness is that the quality of the AI evaluations is uncertain without comparison to expert judgments, which could limit how much trust one can put in the results. A good and obvious next step would be to run calibration studies comparing Arbiter’s outputs with expert reviews, on a wider range of bio-AI tools.

Regarding minimal code replication, I managed to run Arbiter and the tests without issue.

This project is very well conceived prototype. Translating the Global Risk Index into an automated system is brilliant, the GRI is already being used as the cornerstone of AI-Bio risk.

The documentation could use more usage examples, the flow diagram from the paper can also go into the documentation. Since the paper notes risks of amplifying dual-use details, the repo can use this disclaimer too.

Key strengths of the approach

There were strong visual aids (clear flowchart, table) that guides the reader. The effective example: Europe PMC database was also helpful to understand how this could be used. I liked that it built on existing literature (GRI paper) by building the tool from the appendix. There was also a clear explanation of stages and objectives of the tool. Some key gaps were identified acknowledging both risks and transformative benefits. The need for this tool was very clear (to keep up with field pace). Also liked that the appendix mentions information hazards and implementation feasibility along with availability of full-text research papers

Specific areas for improvement

Definition of “risk” unclear(maybe this was in the GRI paper?)

Unclear intended audience (researchers or policymakers). The tool felt a little bit reactive (which by itself is ok), since it was based on someone querying.

Policymaker use-case unrealistic without keyword expertise. Also, unsure how this connects or feeds into governance.

Not sure about tool’s ability to remain up-to-date (maybe this is just through scanning or API calls?)

Another limitation could be that we were limited to public tools, not dark web/closed communities.

Suggestions for how to develop this into a stronger project

Clarify risk definition (draw distinction from GRI paper if needed)

Specify target users and tailor tool accordingly.

Discuss handling of non-public datasets or acknowledge limitation explicitly

Potential next steps or future directions

Explore integration into policymaking frameworks (e.g., EU AI Act) or EU Market Surveillance directives.

Frame tool as an “early warning system” with policy applications

The submissions presents an LLM crawler of scientific literature analyzing it for biorisk according to the GRI framework.

While the project sketches out the technical architecture, it would be strengthened by demonstrating practical utility and contrasting to alternative approaches.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) Arbiter: Automated Review of Bio-AI Tools for Emerging Risk

},

author={

Ryan Teo, Shrestha Rath

},

date={

9/15/25

},

organization={Apart Research},

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

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

Apr 27, 2026

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

PROTEUS (PROTein Evaluation for Unusual Sequences): Structure-Informed Safety Screening for de novo and Evasion-Prone Protein-Coding Sequences

AI protein design tools like RFdiffusion, ProteinMPNN, and Bindcraft make it trivial to produce low-homology sequences that fold into active, potentially hazardous architectures. However, sequence homology-based biosafety screening tools cannot detect proteins that pose functional risk through structurally novel mechanisms with no sequence precedent. We present a tiered computational pipeline that addresses this gap by combining MMseqs2 sequence alignment with structure-based comparison via FoldSeek and DALI against curated toxin databases totaling ~34,000 entries. AlphaFold2-predicted structures are screened for both global fold similarity (FoldSeek) and local active/allosteric site geometry (DALI), capturing convergent functional hazards that sequence screening misses. The pipeline was validated against a panel of toxins, benign proteins, structural mimics, and de novo-designed Munc13 binders, as well as modified ricin variants with residue substitutions. We additionally tested robustness to partial-synthesis evasion, where a bad actor submits multiple shorter coding sequences intended for downstream reassembly into a full toxin-coding gene. We found that while sequence-based screening did not identify any de novo ricin analogues with high certainty, the combined pipeline with FoldSeek and DALI identified all 24 tested de novo ricins as toxic.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

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.