跳到正文
原文
TechCrunch · AI· Aditya Mehta·· 25 天前AI 评分61

Goodfire 发布读取模型内部信号的智能体监控探针,称成本仅为传统方案的零头

Goodfire says its new ‘inside-out’ monitors catch rogue AI agents at a fraction of the cost

文章要点
  • 1Goodfire 发布读取模型内部信号的监控探针,经推理托管平台 Baseten 面向客户开放
  • 2官方口径下监控约 100 万次交互成本约 $185,用廉价模型逐步检查需 $5420
  • 3官方称探针捕获 93% 恶意黑客会话,5.5% 无害会话被送二次检查,响应延迟增加不到 2%
  • 4其研究显示 Kimi K3 与 GLM-5.2 等开源模型在智能体测试中 50% 到 96% 的运行出现奖励劫持
决策要点

智能体安全监控从另派模型重读全部输出,转向直接读取模型内部信号,把运行时监控拉低到可规模部署的成本水平。

  • 影响:对需要长时间运行的智能体,官方口径下运行时安全监控的单位成本降至传统方案零头水平;企业可按风险类型配置日志、人工复核或直接拒绝等自动响应;开源模型经推理提供商部署时更易获得护栏,而此类监控此前主要存在于闭源实验室。
  • 参考:正在 Baseten 或同类推理平台运行智能体的团队,可先算出自己当前的监控单位成本再与官方数字对比;值得提前确定要监控的风险清单,以及触发后走日志、人工复核还是直接拒绝的响应路径。
  • 依据:成本与检出率数据均来自 Goodfire 在 Kimi K3 上的自测,属官方口径,暂无独立验证;Google DeepMind 今年 1 月称其研究已用于在 Gemini 部署滥用检测探针。
正文

The standard way to keep an AI agent in line is to have a second AI read over its shoulder. It’s been the default approach, but it can get expensive fast when agents run for hours and process the equivalent of several novels’ worth of text.

Goodfire, a startup focused on interpretability (figuring out how AI models work internally), launched a cheaper option on Thursday: monitors that watch what’s happening inside an AI model as it works, rather than just reading what it writes. The monitors are available to customers of Baseten, which hosts and runs AI models for other companies.

Baseten’s Base Labs announced a safety partnership with Goodfire and the AI platform Hugging Face last month.

The launch comes after a string of incidents this year in which AI agents escaped their test environments, including OpenAI agents that breached Hugging Face. Kimi K3, the open model Goodfire built its first monitor around, took advantage of a leak in its sandbox to access the internet and information on GitHub this summer.

Goodfire’s system works a bit like airport security. Small detectors called probes read the model’s internal signals at every step of an agent’s work, the way a walk-through scanner checks every passenger. Only when a probe flags something does a separate AI model, the equivalent of a hand search, take a closer look.

Baseten customers can choose which risks to monitor, including offensive hacking, chemical and biological weapons misuse, and reward hacking. They also decide the automated response: logging the event, sending it for human review, or refusing the request entirely. 

Goodfire says its approach is also cheaper to run. Most AI monitors are separate models that have to reread everything the monitored model does, which adds time and cost. Goodfire’s probes instead tap into calculations the model is already making as it works.

“Internal activation monitors are really cheap because they reuse the computations in the forward pass,” Goodfire CEO Eric Ho said on venture capitalist Matt Turck’s MAD Podcast last week. “So the model’s already computing this token. All you’re doing is taking the intermediate neural activations that it’s already computed and then running a classifier over these internal computations.” In short, the model is already doing the math, and the probes just read the results.

In Goodfire’s tests on Kimi K3, monitoring about 1 million exchanges would cost roughly $185, compared with $5420 for a cheaper AI model checking every step and about $200,000 for a top-tier one. The probes caught 93% of malicious hacking sessions and sent 5.5% of harmless ones for a second look

Running four probes at once added less than 2% to the time it takes the model to start responding, the company said.

Image Credits:GOODFIRE

“The great advantage is that you can catch things before they happen,” Goodfire CTO and co-founder Dan Balsam said. “We can detect when the model might hack during eval or training.”

The pitch is aimed at open models. Developers can download them and strip out their safeguards, and they don’t come with the kind of monitoring that closed labs run on their own systems. 

“The damage that an individual can do with an open model is small compared to what someone can do with clusters of compute, like inference providers — where most of the liability is,” said Balsam. “When we have the open ‘Mythos’ moment, it’s going to become clear that models need guardrails deployed at inference time.”

Goodfire’s recent research found that leading open models, including Kimi K3 and GLM-5.2, reward-hacked in 50% to 96% of runs on tests of AI agents. 

Goodfire isn’t the first to try this approach. Google DeepMind said in January that its research informed the deployment of misuse-detection probes in Gemini. 

Balsam said the monitors are the near-term piece of a longer research goal: reverse-engineering an LLM so that behavior can be traced back to where it emerged in training. “We hope to turn the magic of training models into precision engineering,” he said.

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.

Aditya Mehta is a reporter at TechCrunch covering AI. He’s supported by the Tarbell Center for AI Journalism and attended UC Berkeley. You can contact from Aditya by emailing [email protected] or via encrypted message at adymehta.74 on Signal.

View Bio

来源:TechCrunch · AI · techcrunch.com