AI red-teaming is a sociotechnical problem: on values, labor, and harms

Tarleton Gillespie, Ryland Shaw, Mary L. Gray, Jina Suh
12/12/2024
cs.CYcs.AIcs.HC

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

As generative AI technologies find more and more real-world applications, the importance of testing their performance and safety seems paramount. "Red-teaming" has quickly become the primary approach to test AI models--prioritized by AI companies, and enshrined in AI policy and regulation. Members of red teams act as adversaries, probing AI systems to test their safety mechanisms and uncover vulnerabilities. Yet we know far too little about this work or its implications. This essay calls for collaboration between computer scientists and social scientists to study the sociotechnical systems surrounding AI technologies, including the work of red-teaming, to avoid repeating the mistakes of the recent past. We highlight the importance of understanding the values and assumptions behind red-teaming, the labor arrangements involved, and the psychological impacts on red-teamers, drawing insights from the lessons learned around the work of content moderation.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{gillespie2024redteaming,
  title  = {AI red-teaming is a sociotechnical problem: on values, labor, and harms},
  author = {Tarleton Gillespie and Ryland Shaw and Mary L. Gray and Jina Suh},
  year   = {2024},
  eprint = {2412.09751},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.09751v3}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2412.09751.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2412.09751)

Discussion