MIT AI Risk Repository: Latest Update
The MIT AI Risk Repository catalogs over 3,000 real-world AI incidents and organizes key risks into two taxonomies—causal and domain-specific. It highlights major concerns including AI safety failures, socioeconomic harms, discrimination, privacy breaches, malicious misuse, misinformation, and unsafe human interactions with AI.
MIT AI Risk Repository: Latest Update
Summary of Read Full Report
This research paper and its accompanying materials create the AI Risk Repository, a comprehensive resource for understanding and addressing risks from artificial intelligence.
The repository includes a database of over 3,000 real-world AI incidents, along with two taxonomies classifying AI risks: a causal taxonomy (by entity, intent, and timing) and a domain taxonomy (by seven broad domains and 23 subdomains).
Based on the AI Risk Repository, here are the top 10 AI risks, presented in bullet points, and categorized by their domain, with emphasis on their frequency in the source documents:
- AI System Safety, Failures & Limitations: This domain is the most frequently discussed, and includes these top risks:
- AI pursuing its own goals in conflict with human goals or values: This risk is mentioned in 46% of the documents.
- Lack of capability or robustness: A frequently discussed risk, mentioned in 59% of the documents
- Socioeconomic & Environmental Harms: This domain is also frequently discussed and includes:
- Power centralization and unfair distribution of benefits, mentioned in 37% of the documents
- Increased inequality and decline in employment quality, mentioned in 34% of the documents
- Discrimination & Toxicity: A frequently discussed domain including:
- Unfair discrimination and misrepresentation: This risk is mentioned in 63% of the documents.
- Privacy & Security: This domain includes:
- Compromise of privacy by obtaining, leaking, or correctly inferring sensitive information: This risk is mentioned in 61% of the documents.
- Malicious Actors & Misuse: This domain includes:
- Cyberattacks, weapon development or use, and mass harm: This risk is mentioned in 54% of the documents.
- Misinformation: This domain includes:
- False or misleading information: Mentioned in 39% of the documents.
- Human-Computer Interaction: This domain includes:
- Overreliance and unsafe use: This risk is mentioned in 24% of documents.
It is important to note that while these risks are frequently discussed in the source documents, other risks which are discussed less frequently, such as AI welfare and rights, and pollution of the information ecosystem and loss of consensus reality, may also be of significant importance.
Related Articles
Gemini 3.1 Pro and the Case for Model-Agnostic Agentic Infrastructure
Google's Gemini 3.1 Pro doubled its reasoning benchmarks overnight. Here's why that makes model-agnostic agentic infrastructure more critical than ever.
Google Gemini 3.1 Pro, ChatGPT Ads, and Why Organizations Need to Own Their AI Infrastructure
Google launches Gemini 3.1 Pro with advanced reasoning while OpenAI rolls out ads in ChatGPT. These two moves reveal a growing tension in enterprise AI: who controls the intelligence layer, and whose interests does it serve?
ChatGPT Now Has Ads — And It Should Change How You Think About AI Infrastructure
OpenAI has started showing ads inside ChatGPT responses. This marks a turning point: organizations relying on consumer AI tools are now subject to someone else's monetization strategy. Here's why owning your AI infrastructure matters more than ever.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Just Dropped — Here's What It Means for Organizations Running Their Own AI
Google's Gemini 3.1 Pro launched today with 1M-token context, native multimodal reasoning, and agentic tool use. Here's why model releases like this one matter most to organizations that own their AI infrastructure — and why locking into a single provider is the costliest mistake you can make.
See the ibl.ai AI Operating System in Action
Discover how leading universities and organizations are transforming education with the ibl.ai AI Operating System. Explore real-world implementations from Harvard, MIT, Stanford, and users from 400+ institutions worldwide.
View Case StudiesGet Started with ibl.ai
Choose the plan that fits your needs and start transforming your educational experience today.