Our research
How should we navigate explosive AI progress?
Featured
Preparing for the Intelligence Explosion
William MacAskill & Fin Moorhouse
March 2025
AI that can accelerate research could drive a century of technological progress over just a few years. During such a period, new technological or political developments will raise consequential and hard-to-reverse decisions, in rapid succession. We call these developments grand challenges.
These challenges include new weapons of mass destruction, AI-enabled autocracies, races to grab offworld resources, and digital beings worthy of moral consideration, as well as opportunities to dramatically improve quality of life and collective decision-making.
We argue that these challenges cannot always be delegated to future AI systems, and suggest things we can do today to meaningfully improve our prospects. AGI preparedness is therefore not just about ensuring that advanced AI systems are aligned: we should be preparing, now, for the disorienting range of developments an intelligence explosion would bring.
AI-Enabled Coups: How a Small Group Could Use AI to Seize Power
Tom Davidson, Lukas Finnveden & Rose Hadshar
April 2025
The development of AI that is more broadly capable than humans will create a new and serious threat: AI-enabled coups. An AI-enabled coup could be staged by a very small group, or just a single person, and could occur even in established democracies. Sufficiently advanced AI will introduce three novel dynamics that significantly increase coup risk. Firstly, military and government leaders could fully replace human personnel with AI systems that are singularly loyal to them, eliminating the need to gain human supporters for a coup. Secondly, leaders of AI projects could deliberately build AI systems that are secretly loyal to them, for example fully autonomous military robots that pass security tests but later execute a coup when deployed in military settings. Thirdly, senior officials within AI projects or the government could gain exclusive access to superhuman capabilities in weapons development, strategic planning, persuasion, and cyber offense, and use these to increase their power until they can stage a coup. To address these risks, AI projects should design and enforce rules against AI misuse, audit systems for secret loyalties, and share frontier AI systems with multiple stakeholders. Governments should establish principles for government use of advanced AI, increase oversight of frontier AI projects, and procure AI for critical systems from multiple independent providers.
Better Futures
Series
William MacAskill
August 2025
Suppose we want the future to go better. What should we do?
One approach is to avoid near-term catastrophes, like human extinction. This essay series explores a different, complementary, approach: improving on futures where we survive, to achieve a truly great future.
Will AI R&D Automation Cause a Software Intelligence Explosion?
Daniel Eth & Tom Davidson
March 2025
AI companies are increasingly using AI systems to accelerate AI research and development. Today’s AI systems help researchers write code, analyze research papers, and generate training data. Future systems could be significantly more capable – potentially automating the entire AI development cycle from formulating research questions and designing experiments to implementing, testing, and refining new AI systems. We argue that such systems could trigger a runaway feedback loop in which they quickly develop more advanced AI, which itself speeds up the development of even more advanced AI, resulting in extremely fast AI progress, even without the need for additional computer chips. Empirical evidence on the rate at which AI research efforts improve AI algorithms suggests that this positive feedback loop could overcome diminishing returns to continued AI research efforts. We evaluate two additional bottlenecks to rapid progress: training AI systems from scratch takes months, and improving AI algorithms often requires computationally expensive experiments. However, we find that there are possible workarounds that could enable a runaway feedback loop nonetheless.
AI Tools for Existential Security
Lizka Vaintrob & Owen Cotton-Barratt
March 2025
Humanity is not prepared for the AI-driven challenges we face. But the right AI tools could help us to anticipate and work together to meet these challenges — if they’re available in time. We can and should accelerate these tools.
Key applications include (1) epistemic tools, which improve human judgement; (2) coordination tools, which help diverse groups work identify and work towards shared goals; (3) risk-targeted tools to address specific challenges.
We can accelerate important tools by investing in task-relevant data, lowering adoption barriers, and securing compute for key R&D. While background AI progress limits potential gains, even small speedups could be decisive.
This is a priority area. There is lots to do already, and there will quickly be more. We should get started, and we should plan for a world with abundant cognition.
Stay up to date with our research
Stay up to speed with the latest research on preparing for transformative AI. Roughly weekly.
By subscribing you agree to Substack's terms of service. Unsubscribe anytime. Archives.
Research
Could one country outgrow the rest of the world?
Tom Davidson

Abstract
When countries grow at the same exponential rate, they maintain their relative sizes. But after we develop AGI, there may be a period of superexponential growth, with growth becoming faster and faster over time. If this superexponential growth lasts for long enough, the leader could pull further and further ahead of the others, eventually producing >99% of global output, and outgrowing the rest of the world combined. This post gives a basic economic analysis of this dynamic and argues that the leading country in AI development could outgrow the world, but only if it was trying hard to do so.
Author
Tom Davidson
Topic
Threat modelling
How quick and big would a software intelligence explosion be?
Tom Davidson & Tom Houlden

Abstract
In previous work, we’ve argued that AI that can automate AI R&D could lead to a software intelligence explosion. But just how dramatic would this actually be? In this paper, we model how much AI progress we’ll see before a software intelligence explosion fizzles out. Averaged over one year, we find that AI progress could easily be 3X faster, might be 10X faster, but won’t be 30X faster - because at that speed we’d quickly hit limits on how good software can get.
Authors
Tom Davidson & Tom Houlden
Topic
Modelling AI progress
Better Futures
Series
William MacAskill

Abstract
Suppose we want the future to go better. What should we do?
One approach is to avoid near-term catastrophes, like human extinction. This essay series explores a different, complementary, approach: improving on futures where we survive, to achieve a truly great future.
Author
William MacAskill
Topic
Macrostrategy
Introducing Better Futures
William MacAskill
Part 1 of Better Futures

Abstract
Suppose we want the future to go better. What should we do?
One approach is to avoid near-term catastrophes, like human extinction. This essay series explores a different, complementary, approach: improving on futures where we survive, to achieve a truly great future.
Author
William MacAskill
Topic
Macrostrategy
Series
No Easy Eutopia
Fin Moorhouse & William MacAskill
Part 2 of Better Futures

Abstract
How big is the target we need to hit to reach a mostly great future? We argue that, on most plausible views, only a narrow range of futures meet this bar, and even common-sense utopias miss out on almost all their potential.
Authors
Fin Moorhouse & William MacAskill
Topic
Macrostrategy
Series
Convergence and Compromise
Fin Moorhouse & William MacAskill
Part 3 of Better Futures

Abstract
Even if the target is narrow, will there be forces which nonetheless hone in on near-best futures? We argue society is unlikely to converge on them by default. Trade and compromise make eutopias seem more achievable, but still we should expect ‘default’ outcomes to fall far short.
Authors
Fin Moorhouse & William MacAskill
Topic
Macrostrategy
Series
How to Make the Future Better
William MacAskill
Part 5 of Better Futures

Abstract
I suggest a number of concrete actions we can take now to make the future go better.
Author
William MacAskill
Topic
Macrostrategy
Series
Persistent Path-Dependence
William MacAskill
Part 4 of Better Futures

Abstract
Over sufficiently long time horizons, will the effects of actions to improve the quality of the future just ‘wash out’? Against this view, I argue a number of plausible near-term events will have persistent and predictable path-dependent effects on the value of the future.
Author
William MacAskill
Topic
Macrostrategy
Series
Supplement: The Basic Case for Better Futures
William MacAskill & Philip Trammell
Part 6 of Better Futures

Abstract
How do we compare working on reducing catastrophe with improving the quality of the future? We introduce a simple model (EV ≈ S*F) and use the 'scale, neglectedness, tractability' framework to argue that improving Flourishing is of comparable priority to increasing the chance of Surviving.
Authors
William MacAskill & Philip Trammell
Topic
Macrostrategy
Series
The Industrial Explosion
Tom Davidson & Rose Hadshar

Abstract
Once AI can automate human labour, physical capabilities could grow explosively. Sufficiently advanced robotics could create a feedback loop where automated robot factories build more and better robot factories which build more and better robot factories. In this piece, we examine three stages of an industrial explosion: AI-directed human labour, fully automated physical labour, and nanotechnology. An industrial explosion would arise in a world which already has greatly increased cognitive capabilities, and could ultimately become extremely fast, with the amount of physical labour doubling in days.
Authors
Tom Davidson & Rose Hadshar
Topic
Modelling AI progress
Is There a Half-Life for the Success Rates of AI Agents?
Toby Ord

Abstract
Building on the recent empirical work of Kwa et al. (2025), I show that within their suite of research-engineering tasks the performance of AI agents on longer-duration tasks can be explained by an extremely simple mathematical model — a constant rate of failing during each minute a human would take to do the task. This implies an exponentially declining success rate with the length of the task and that each agent could be characterised by its own half-life. This empirical regularity allows us to estimate the success rate for an agent at different task lengths. And the fact that this model is a good fit for the data is suggestive of the underlying causes of failure on longer tasks — that they involve increasingly large sets of subtasks where failing any one fails the task. Whether this model applies more generally on other suites of tasks is unknown and an important subject for further work.
Author
Toby Ord
Topic
Modelling AI progress
AI-Enabled Coups: How a Small Group Could Use AI to Seize Power
Tom Davidson, Lukas Finnveden & Rose Hadshar

Abstract
The development of AI that is more broadly capable than humans will create a new and serious threat: AI-enabled coups. An AI-enabled coup could be staged by a very small group, or just a single person, and could occur even in established democracies. Sufficiently advanced AI will introduce three novel dynamics that significantly increase coup risk. Firstly, military and government leaders could fully replace human personnel with AI systems that are singularly loyal to them, eliminating the need to gain human supporters for a coup. Secondly, leaders of AI projects could deliberately build AI systems that are secretly loyal to them, for example fully autonomous military robots that pass security tests but later execute a coup when deployed in military settings. Thirdly, senior officials within AI projects or the government could gain exclusive access to superhuman capabilities in weapons development, strategic planning, persuasion, and cyber offense, and use these to increase their power until they can stage a coup. To address these risks, AI projects should design and enforce rules against AI misuse, audit systems for secret loyalties, and share frontier AI systems with multiple stakeholders. Governments should establish principles for government use of advanced AI, increase oversight of frontier AI projects, and procure AI for critical systems from multiple independent providers.
Authors
Tom Davidson, Lukas Finnveden & Rose Hadshar
Topics
International governance & Corporate Governance
Show all