¿Está México preparado institucionalmente para contener los riesgos en inteligencia artificial?

Alejandra Leyva

Este proyecto propone el Mapa de Riesgos para la Soberanía de IA, aplicado al caso mexicano. El objetivo es evaluar si México cuenta con una base institucional suficiente para adoptar inteligencia artificial y si tiene capacidad de respuesta ante distintos escenarios de riesgo. Para ello se construyó una base de datos a partir de las acciones que el gobierno mexicano ha tomado en materia de IA. Estas acciones se clasificaron según la categoría y la vía de riesgo propuestas, se vincularon con su relación con la soberanía de IA y se evaluó su estado actual de implementación.

Los resultados muestran que la agenda pública se concentra principalmente en riesgos de corto plazo, en particular el uso malicioso de la IA y el manejo de datos públicos y privados. Los riesgos más estructurales (seguridad computacional, concentración de poder y pérdida de control) tienen una cobertura institucional considerablemente menor. El hallazgo principal es que México no sólo enfrenta un vacío regulatorio, sino un problema de dirección estratégica: la política pública sobre IA necesita pasar de una lógica reactiva a una aproximación preventiva, capaz de anticipar riesgos y fortalecer capacidades públicas.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

Este proyecto aborda una pregunta importante para países que no están en el centro del desarrollo de modelos de frontera: cómo adoptar inteligencia artificial sin perder control sobre datos, infraestructura, proveedores, sistemas públicos y decisiones institucionales. Su principal contribución es el Mapa de Riesgos para la Soberanía de IA, que adapta categorías de riesgo al caso de un país como México. El marco es útil porque no se limita a preguntar si existe regulación de IA, sino qué tipo de riesgos están siendo cubiertos y cuáles permanecen fuera de la agenda institucional.

El hallazgo central es plausible y relevante: la acción pública mexicana parece concentrarse en riesgos visibles y de corto plazo, como deepfakes, fraude, uso malicioso y datos personales, mientras que riesgos más estructurales aparecen menos desarrollados. Esta es una buena intuición de política pública: el reto no es solamente producir más iniciativas sobre IA, sino desplazar la agenda desde una lógica reactiva hacia una lógica preventiva.

La principal limitación es metodológica. El trabajo no explica con suficiente detalle el universo de registros analizados, los criterios de inclusión y exclusión, la rúbrica de codificación, ni cómo se resolvieron los casos ambiguos. Tampoco hay mecanismos de validación robustos. Una segunda limitación es que el estudio mide cobertura de agenda más que preparación institucional. El marco también ganaría si la variable de “soberanía de IA” dejara de ser binaria.

En conjunto, el proyecto ofrece un marco útil y una lectura políticamente relevante de la agenda mexicana de IA. Su intuición principal es fuerte: México necesita pasar de respuestas reactivas a una estrategia preventiva de soberanía y capacidad estatal. Sin embargo, la ejecución todavía es preliminar y debe reforzarse para que el diagnóstico pueda sostener con más fuerza la pregunta central sobre preparación institucional.

valuable framing and important cause, but ultimately the framework is a synthesis of existing taxonomies, not something novel. Execution has significant gaps connected to lack of critical detail and uneven presentation. It reads like a a gap between ambition and execution, and the good news is that it means the author's instinct in on the right track.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) ¿Está México preparado institucionalmente para contener los riesgos en inteligencia artificial?

},

author={

Alejandra Leyva

},

date={

},

organization={Apart Research},

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

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

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

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

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

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

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.