Apr 27, 2026
The Three Laws of AI Biosafety: A Constitutional Governance Framework for AI Biodesign Tools
Yasmin Soltani
Most biosecurity governance tools look at either how dangerous an AI biodesign tool is, or how vulnerable an organization is, but nobody has connected the two into a single framework that organizations can actually use to assess themselves. This project builds one. Inspired by Asimov's Laws of Robotics and Anthropic's Constitutional AI, the Three Laws of AI Biosafety proposes three ordered governance principles that must be satisfied sequentially before a biotool can be considered governance-ready.
We thank the author for this submission. The presentation of three core laws, together with readiness frameworks, for biological AI models is compelling. Furthermore, it is somewhat surprising that the author finds insufficient dual-use characterization, as opposed to access controls or technological development, as the prevailing failure mode. One of the most interesting components in this work is the assessment of readiness for a given biological model. The composition would benefit from discussion in the main text as opposed to the appendix. Furthermore, regarding amendments to the framework, what would inform the need for any alterations? Do you think that the approach itself will need to be updated with newer technologies?
This a clear and well presented idea and provides a valuable framework which others could utilise or build upon. Having three clearly defined laws broken into the smaller subsections is clever, useful, and provides a powerful framework to build governance into AI-BDTs / AI-BTs. The clear tiers and color-coding make it easily accessible to policy audiences or the general public, which helps communicate the risks and get governance systems built.
This especially stood out, "The consistent finding across all eight tools is that organizations know what their tools do, but
have not formally assessed what their tools could be made to do." I feel like it is well-accepted in biosecurity that many of these tool makers are very excited by the research and scientific possibilities and never think of dual-use concerns. It is nice this helps formalize and highlight that better.
I also think this tool helps with governance arguments if it had mandated adoption. I could see in the reporting that argument being made stronger. Some tool makers might balk at restrictions, but if ALL tools are assessed in the same, shared framework it helps with uptake and acceptance.
Limitations are well flagged that this is 8 tools assessed by one reviewer, but it is a nice proof of principle for a hackathon.
The color scheme took some thinking at first, or it could just be me. Green reads as 'not dangerous' when here it really means 'governance ready' so more like 'danger can be mitigated.' But then two tools could be red and one is 'dangerous and not governance ready for XY reasons' and the other is 'not dangerous but not governance ready?'
AI Capability is somewhat a broad term and it is not inherently logical that dual use falls under it, to me at least.
The five-level maturity model seem reminiscent of Capability Maturity Model Integration used in software. The report could have highlighted that if it was a source of inspiration and if not, it is worth looking into that for further refinement and work on the framework.
I like the rhetorical framing with Constitutional AI and Asimov but it is not exactly accurate. Anthropic's constitutional AI refers to a specific RLAIF process and Asimov's laws are maybe a bit more hierarchical than these which are more sequential. But maybe I misread this and better presentation and description fixes that.
Overall a strong submission.
Great work!
The "Three Laws" framing is doing more rhetorical work than mechanical work though, the load-bearing part is a maturity rubric with a passing threshold and a stop rule. The dual-use under-characterization finding is a great real contribution and I'd lead with it. A sensitivity analysis on the threshold would tell us whether the gap you're diagnosing is real or a property of the cutoff.
Cite this work
@misc {
title={
(HckPrj) The Three Laws of AI Biosafety: A Constitutional Governance Framework for AI Biodesign Tools
},
author={
Yasmin Soltani
},
date={
4/27/26
},
organization={Apart Research},
note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},
howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}
}


