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.
5 works on “Can we see what it’s thinking?” · clear filters
Researchers from rival labs argue that reading a model's step-by-step reasoning is a rare chance to spot intent to misbehave, but one that training and design choices could easily lose.
Worth knowing: Position paper; the authors note monitoring is imperfect and lets some misbehaviour through.
Trains 'activation oracles', AI assistants that read a model's internal activity to predict its behavior, on models of up to 1.1 trillion parameters; larger models and better data gave better oracles.
Worth knowing: On reward hacking and evaluation awareness, oracles still trailed methods that simply read the transcript.
Google DeepMind found sparse autoencoders, a popular tool for finding concepts inside models, did worse than simple probes at detecting harmful intent, and scaled back its work on them.
Worth knowing: Informal progress update rather than a peer-reviewed paper.
Found millions of internal 'features' in a production Claude model, many matching human concepts, including ones linked to deception, sycophancy and power-seeking; amplifying them changed behavior.
Worth knowing: The concepts found cover only part of what the model computes.
Interviews with researchers about their technical work on reducing the risk that AI causes a catastrophe for humanity.
Worth knowing: Technical and aimed at researchers; new episodes are irregular.