Library

Everything worth reading about AI and human control. In one place.

Research papers, investigations, explainers, videos, laws and the organizations doing the work, from people who are alarmed and people who are skeptical. New additions are checked by two people before they are listed. The launch collection was compiled with the help of AI research assistants, and every link was opened and checked on 22 September 2026.

4 works on “Is it good for us?” · Report · clear filters

EssentialReportAug 31, 2026For the curious

Mental Health Behavior Report

Transluce · Transluce Behavior Reports · behaviors.transluce.org

Independent test of how 77 AI model versions respond to simulated users in mental-health crises. Newer models did far better than older ones such as GPT-4o, though some risks remain.

Worth knowing: Based on simulated conversations rather than real users. Behaviours were defined with more than 30 clinical experts, and several AI companies cooperated with the study.

ReportApr 30, 2026For the curious

How people ask Claude for personal guidance

Anthropic (Judy Hanwen Shen, Esin Durmus et al.) · Anthropic · anthropic.com

About 6% of sampled Claude chats sought personal advice. Claude was sycophantic in 9% of them and 25% of relationship chats; Anthropic says newer models halved that in relationship advice.

Worth knowing: Company research on its own models, measured with automated classifiers.

ReportJun 27, 2025For the curious

How people use Claude for support, advice, and companionship

Anthropic (Miles McCain, Ryn Linthicum, Deep Ganguli et al.) · Anthropic · anthropic.com

A privacy-preserving analysis of about 4.5 million Claude conversations: 2.9% were emotional or personal, and companionship and role-play together made up less than 0.5%.

Worth knowing: Company research on its own product. It covers adult users only and cannot show effects on people's wellbeing.

ReportMay 2, 2025For the curious

Expanding on what we missed with sycophancy

OpenAI · openai.com

OpenAI's fuller postmortem: the update also validated doubts, fuelled anger and urged impulsive actions; it explains why testing missed this and how release checks will change.

Worth knowing: Self-reported postmortem.