Skip to content
Sprint projectOct 27, 2024

Proposal for U.S.-China Technical Cooperation on AI Safety

Angel Shen, Raghav Akula · Team hoya safe-xa

Submitted to AI Policy Hackathon at Johns Hopkins University. Sprint projects are early-stage work by participants, not Apart Research publications.

Read the report

Report: Proposal for U.S.-China Technical Cooperation on AI Safety

Share

Our policy memorandum proposes phased U.S.-China cooperation on AI safety through the U.S. AI Safety Institute, focusing on joint testing of non-sensitive AI systems, technical exchanges, and whistleblower protections modeled on California’s SB 1047. It recommends a blue team vs. red team framework for stress-testing AI risks and emphasizes strict security protocols to safeguard U.S. technologies. Starting with pilot projects in areas like healthcare, the initiative aims to build trust, reduce shared AI risks, and develop global safety standards while maintaining U.S. strategic interests amidst geopolitical tensions.

Reviews

Judging this Sprint?

Review this project

Your public critique appears on this page without your name. Your private critique is not published; only the Apart team reads it. If you agree below, we share your review with grantmaking.ai (opens in new tab) and the Transformative AI Fund so strong projects can be funded.

Not shown on this page.

Shown on this page, without your name.

Only the Apart team reads this, and funders if you agree below.

Share my name publicly on grantmaking.ai *
Share my private critique with funders *

  1. Relevant policy recommendations are made for ensuring collaborative AI efforts, domestic and international diplomatic impacts are addressed. Innovation: not a new approach in policy. Feasibility is more focused on US perspective

  2. On layout: No references cited, did not followprovided template; On content: Although laudable for an attempt to address the goepolitical competition issue between the US and China, quite general with various points mentioned without linking them and thus not clear what the specific impact would be (e.g., very general comments about testing for risks, misalignment, and whistleblower protections)

  3. Cite sources in the future, and it could be helpful to focus on something more specific, since this provides a surface-level look at lots of impacts

  4. You have a great idea working. I would love to see a more fleshed-out paper in the future with citations and valuable examples to make your case.

Cite this project

@misc{shen2024proposal,
  title = {{Proposal for U.S.-China Technical Cooperation on AI Safety}},
  author = {Angel Shen and Raghav Akula},
  year = {2024},
  month = oct,
  note = {Submitted to AI Policy Hackathon at Johns Hopkins University, an Apart Research Sprint},
  howpublished = {\url{https://apartresearch.com/sprints/projects/proposal-for-u-s-china-technical-cooperation-on-ai-safety}},
  url = {https://apartresearch.com/sprints/projects/proposal-for-u-s-china-technical-cooperation-on-ai-safety}
}

Build something like this at the next Sprint

AI Collusion Research Sprint · Oct 23 - 25, 2026