Fundamental Impossibility Results in AI Safety: Trading Off between Desiderata

Ida Mattsson, Ratip Emin Berker, Emanuel Tewolde, Ioannis Anagnostides, Kiriaki Fragkia +9 more
10/19/2026
cs.GTcs.AI

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

Is there a fundamental tradeoff between desiderata for safe AI systems, such as harmlessness and helpfulness? We answer by formalizing the interaction between AI systems and users as a game with three players: a defender and an attacker that are computationally or informationally bounded, and an AI that provides public advice and is less constrained. Our main result shows that there is a fundamental tradeoff in providing advice that helps the defender while advice remains public. We also consider whether the information that the AI shares can be manipulated to benefit only the defender and conclude with a discussion of how we can use these results in designing safer AI systems.

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{mattsson2026fundamental,
  title  = {Fundamental Impossibility Results in AI Safety: Trading Off between Desiderata},
  author = {Ida Mattsson and Ratip Emin Berker and Emanuel Tewolde and Ioannis Anagnostides and Kiriaki Fragkia and Xinyu Liu and Alexander Heckett and Jiayuan Liu and Eden Hartman and Vojtěch Kovařík and Sven Neth and Maria-Florina Balcan and Tuomas Sandholm and Vincent Conitzer},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2610.27373},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2610.27373v1}
}

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/2610.27373.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2610.27373)

Discussion