alignmentforum.org·2026/10/12·orthonormal
为什么重要 为前沿模型训练节奏设定最低对齐门槛，可能影响发布流程、安全验收与可解释性投入。
假设我们协调对前沿进行 pacing（而不是彻底暂停或无法协调）。pacing 的标准应该是什么？我提出的最低要求是：在充分 [1] 解决当前一代模型中的所有重大对齐问题之前，实验室不能训练下一代模型（按能力计）。
你不会在弄清楚为什么 Mach 2 飞机不断坠毁之前，就推出一架达到 Mach 3 的飞机。对于任何其他危险技术，我们都不会接受“耸肩并继续前进”。
这一提案可能会吸引许多 prosaic-alignment 乐观主义者和悲观主义者，因为他们通常分歧在于用现有技术修复当前对齐问题有多容易。Prosaic-alignment 乐观主义者可能会预期一种温和
Let's say we coordinate to pace the frontier (rather than pausing outright or failing to coordinate). What should the standard of pacing be?
My proposal for a minimum requirement: a lab cannot train the next generation of models (in terms of capabilities) until they have adequately 1 resolved all significant alignment issues in the present generation of models.
You don't launch a jet that goes at Mach 3 before you've figured out why your Mach 2 jet keeps crashing 2 .
With any other kind of dangerous technology, we wouldn't accept "shrug and move on".
This proposal may appeal to many prosaic-alignment optimists and pessimists, because they usually differ on how easy it would be to fix current alignment issues with current techniques.
Prosaic-alignment optimists might expect that a moder…