Anthropic
Sources used: First-hand material.
The map position is our interpretation of the public statements below. Read the method.
Position, range and evidence details
Preferred pace: 0; stated catastrophic-risk concern: 51. These are layout units, not percentages or rankings.
Pace range: -35 to 45; concern range: 32 to 86. Ranges show alternative editorial interpretations, not statistical confidence intervals.
Evidence clarity: medium. Basis: primary. Implementation: published-policy-and-announced-commitment.
Record status: Corrected record
What this status means
The Atlas interpretation was corrected. This does not mean the person or organization changed its position.
Status recorded: 2026-09-16. This is separate from the source-reading and actor-review dates.
Publication dates and source age
Sources counted: 2
Newest dated source: 2026-09
At least one source was published within the 18-month window.
Assessed at this edition's evidence cutoff: 2026-09-16. 18-month boundary: 2025-03-16.
Publication age does not tell us whether a claim is still valid. Reading an old source again does not make its publication date newer. An update date does not establish that the passage we used was updated.
Open on the map Reading notes · Structured record
What this position covers
Published company safeguards and its announced embedded-evaluator commitment. [1] [2]
Reference this explanation or suggest a correction
Link to this explanation · Suggest a correction · How corrections work
What to keep in mind
Giving outside evaluators access does not commit the company to slow all frontier development. The Responsible Scaling Policy separates company promises from industry recommendations; implementation is not independently audited. [1] [2]
Reference this explanation or suggest a correction
Link to this explanation · Suggest a correction · How corrections work
What they say about the pace of AI
Appendix A promises development delays in specified competitor-related circumstances, not a general training halt. [1]
Find the passage in the source
Appendix A, Anthropic in the lead and Competitors have strong safety measures
Reference this explanation or suggest a correction
Link to this explanation · Suggest a correction · How corrections work
What they say about the pace of AI
The company commits to work with outside evaluators. Wider limits on developing more capable models require coordination. [2]
Find the passage in the source
Three-step plan and Embedded Evaluators
Reference this explanation or suggest a correction
Link to this explanation · Suggest a correction · How corrections work
What they say about catastrophic risk
The policy assesses catastrophic misuse and sabotage that could increase later global-catastrophe risk. [1]
Find the passage in the source
Section 1 and risk-report requirements
Reference this explanation or suggest a correction
Link to this explanation · Suggest a correction · How corrections work
The wider picture
Promises outside scrutiny and conditional safeguards while continuing development. [2] [1]
Reference this explanation or suggest a correction
Link to this explanation · Suggest a correction · How corrections work
Why the position was reassessed
The previous dot treated evaluator access as pace restraint. Reading the company policy separately supports conditional continuation with a wide range. This is an editorial correction, not evidence of a change of mind. [1] [2]
Reference this explanation or suggest a correction
Link to this explanation · Suggest a correction · How corrections work
What can be checked
The policy publishes risk-report and external-review requirements. Announcing a requirement does not establish that it was met in a particular case. [1]
Reference this explanation or suggest a correction
Link to this explanation · Suggest a correction · How corrections work
Share this page
https://theaiatlas.org/groups/anthropic/
Download a share image · Vector image
Image previews are summaries. Keep the page link so readers can check the evidence.
Sources and what we read
1. Responsible Scaling Policy, version 3.4
Publication dates and source age
Sources counted: 1
Newest dated source: 2026-07-08
At least one source was published within the 18-month window.
Assessed at this edition's evidence cutoff: 2026-09-16. 18-month boundary: 2025-03-16.
Publication age does not tell us whether a claim is still valid. Reading an old source again does not make its publication date newer. An update date does not establish that the passage we used was updated.
Read introduction, risk-report requirements, external-review provisions and Appendix A. July 8 is the stated effective date. Separates company commitments from industry recommendations; not an implementation audit.
2. We Must Pace the Frontier
Publication dates and source age
Sources counted: 1
Newest dated source: 2026-09
At least one source was published within the 18-month window.
Assessed at this edition's evidence cutoff: 2026-09-16. 18-month boundary: 2025-03-16.
Publication age does not tell us whether a claim is still valid. Reading an old source again does not make its publication date newer. An update date does not establish that the passage we used was updated.
The essay itself specifies the month. The September 12 publication day is corroborated by the September 14 press roundup. A proposal and a commitment are not independent verification of implementation.
Edition and machine-readable evidence
Content version 0.22.0. Evidence cutoff 2026-09-16; this does not mean every source was read on that day.
Pinned complete dataset · Complete evidence page · Agent consumption guide