Mar 10, 2025

Preparing for Accelerated AGI Timelines

Sofia Mendez, Grace Gong, Mahi Shah

This project examines the prospect of near-term AGI from multiple angles—careers, finances, and logistical readiness. Drawing on various discussions from LessWrong, it highlights how entrepreneurs and those who develop AI-complementary skills may thrive under accelerated timelines, while traditional, incremental career-building could falter. Financial preparedness focuses on striking a balance between stable investments (like retirement accounts) and riskier, AI-exposed opportunities, with an emphasis on retaining adaptability amid volatile market conditions. Logistical considerations—housing decisions, health, and strong social networks—are shown to buffer against unexpected disruptions if entire industries or locations are suddenly reshaped by AI. Together, these insights form a practical roadmap for individuals seeking to navigate the uncertainties of an era when AGI might rapidly transform both labor markets and daily life.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

Hi Sofia, Grace, and Mahi, I really enjoyed reading your project and appreciate the practical relevance of it, that’s the greatest strength of your project. If you’re going forward with it, I see this fitting either as a blogpost or a peer-reviewed article. A few recommendations to strengthen your work:

(1) Add citations in text, it supports your argument and offers a point of reference to the reader. It also clearly distinguishes between what might be your perspective and that of the others/what is backed up by evidence.

(2) While there was a good mix of resources, there is an over-reliance on a single source, which is LessWrong. To strengthen your argument and credibility, I’d try to strike a balance between multiple sources - you can even look historically at academic articles or case studies about how technological advancements have impacted society, and provide that as further insight into the possible effects of AI.

(3) Expand by providing a more detailed, step-by-strep process as to how you did the review in the section “b. Implementation”. Imagine if you were the reader and trying to replicate this, what would you need to write to be clear cut to you?

(4) For greater impact on the reader, add some thought-provoking quotes from the sources you mentioned in section “3. Findings”.

(5) Really go in depth into the implications of your findings, as that will add a lot of practical support to your idea.

Strengths:

- Proactive Approach: The topic is highly relevant, addressing societal and economic implications of accelerated AGI timelines.

- Identification of Challenges: The paper effectively identifies key challenges, such as labor market impacts and investment changes.

- Thematic Organization: Clear categorization into career, financial, and logistical preparedness is a logical structure.

Areas for Improvement:

- Add in-text citations to distinguish between original ideas and existing research.

- Include a detailed methodology section explaining how the literature review was conducted.

- Propose actionable recommendations or novel insights based on the literature reviewed.

- Suggest solutions or mitigation strategies for the challenges identified.

- Analyze limitations and potential negative consequences of the reviewed literature.

- Clearly outline the methodology for reproducibility.

- Improve in-text citations and ensure all sources are properly referenced.

- Expand the discussion to include your own perspective, recommendations, and future research directions.

Suggestions for Future Work:

- Conduct a more systematic literature review, including peer-reviewed research.

- Explore cross-disciplinary perspectives (e.g., ethics, policy) to broaden the scope and impact.

Clearly written and easy to follow, and an interesting perspective.

The main feedback I have is that it seems strange to me to frame this as a problem to be approached on an individual level, rather than on a societal level. It also seems unlikely that such an individual solution will help even the individual for more than a quite limited time. I would have been more excited about a version that focused on what we could to to strengthen resilience on society level (or perhaps if this individual preparation was targeted for a specific group which would be particularly important to keep well prepared so that they can keep up important safety related work)

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

Preparing for Accelerated AGI Timelines

},

author={

Sofia Mendez, Grace Gong, Mahi Shah

},

date={

3/10/25

},

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.