What are novel cryptographic protocols that enhance email security?

The Academic Edge Press delegates to organising the first workshop on Research Paper Writing for 2025.

This workshop provides a clear and practical guide to writing research papers, aimed at students, early-career researchers, and professionals. Participants will learn how to develop a strong research question, conduct a focused literature review, structure their paper effectively, and meet academic writing standards. The session also covers common writing challenges, tips for clarity and coherence, and strategies for successful submission to journals or conferences.

IEEE 2025 5th International Conference on Electronics, Circuits and Information Engineering (ECIE 2025)will be held in Guangzhou,China during May 23-25, 2025.

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) presents unprecedented opportunities across diverse fields, from healthcare and scientific discovery to transportation and entertainment. However, this progress is accompanied by growing concerns regarding the safety and reliability of these increasingly sophisticated systems [4, 6]. As AI agents become more autonomous and capable of complex actions, the potential for unintended consequences, misuse, and even catastrophic risks necessitates a concerted effort to design and deploy AI systems that are aligned with human values and societal well-being [2, 6]. This review synthesizes recent research on the design of safe AI agents, exploring key themes such as human-centered design, risk alignment, socioaffective considerations, and the development of robust safety mechanisms. We examine technical approaches, ethical considerations, and the crucial role of human oversight in ensuring the responsible development and deployment of AI agents.

One prominent approach to designing safe AI agents centers on understanding and incorporating principles of human behavior and cognition [1]. This human-centered approach recognizes that AI systems are ultimately designed to interact with and impact human users, and therefore, their design must reflect and respect human values, goals, and limitations [3].

A key aspect of human-centered design involves drawing inspiration from human self-regulation and goal-setting processes [1]. Humans, as autonomous intelligent agents, have developed sophisticated mechanisms for navigating complex environments and achieving their objectives while minimizing harm. By studying these mechanisms, researchers aim to identify principles that can be translated into the design of safe AI agents [1]. This includes understanding how humans monitor their own actions, adapt to changing circumstances, and prioritize safety and well-being. The development of AI agents that can monitor their own actions, adapt to changing circumstances, and prioritize safety and well-being is paramount [1].

The relationship between humans and AI systems is not solely transactional [3]. As AI agents become more integrated into our lives, they can generate the perception of deeper relationships with users, especially as AI becomes more personalized and agentic. This shift, from transactional interaction to ongoing sustained social engagement with AI, necessitates a new focus on socioaffective alignment-how an AI system behaves within the social and psychological ecosystem co-created with its user, where preferences and perceptions evolve through mutual influence [3]. This involves resolving key intrapersonal dilemmas [3].

In addition to incorporating human behavioral principles, ensuring human agency is a core element of safe AI design [10]. As AI systems become more capable, there is a risk that they could undermine or even usurp human control [10]. AI systems can reshape human intention, and humans lack biological and psychological mechanisms that protect humans from loss of agency [10]. Therefore, it is critical to design AI systems that preserve and enhance human agency, rather than diminish it [10]. This requires careful consideration of how AI systems interact with humans, how they influence decision-making, and how they can be designed to support human autonomy and control [10].

One approach to preserving human agency involves the development of human-AI copilot systems, where human experts can intervene in the training and operation of AI agents [14]. Human intervention is an effective way to inject human knowledge into the training loop of reinforcement learning, which can bring fast learning and ensured training safety [14]. These systems allow humans to provide guidance, correct errors, and ensure that the AI agent remains aligned with human values and goals [14].

The design of AI agents that account for human beliefs about their intentions can also improve human-AI collaboration [18]. A limitation of most existing approaches is their assumption that human behavior remains static, regardless of the AI agent's actions [18]. In reality, humans may adjust their actions based on their beliefs about the AI's intentions, specifically, the subtasks they perceive the AI to be attempting to complete based on its behavior [18]. By incorporating a model of human beliefs, AI agents can better understand and respond to human needs, leading to more effective collaboration [18].

As AI agents become more autonomous, the concept of risk alignment becomes increasingly important [2]. Risk alignment involves ensuring that AI systems have appropriate attitudes toward risk, aligning with the risk preferences of their users and society more broadly [2]. AIs with reckless attitudes toward risk (either because they are calibrated to reckless human users or are poorly designed) may pose significant threats [2].

One key area of research focuses on defining and measuring risk attitudes in AI systems [2]. This involves identifying the factors that influence an agent's decision-making under uncertainty, such as its goals, its knowledge, and its perception of the environment [2]. Researchers are exploring how to calibrate AI systems to the risk attitudes of their users, taking into account individual differences in risk tolerance [2].

Another important aspect of risk alignment is the development of guardrails and safety mechanisms to prevent AI agents from engaging in risky or harmful behaviors [2]. These guardrails can take various forms, including constraints on the agent's actions, monitoring systems to detect and correct undesirable behaviors, and mechanisms for human oversight and intervention [1, 8].

The ethical considerations involved in designing AI systems that make risky decisions on behalf of others are also paramount [2]. This includes questions of responsibility, accountability, and the potential for bias [2]. It is crucial to ensure that AI systems are designed in a way that is fair, transparent, and accountable, and that they do not exacerbate existing social inequalities [2].

The development of AI agents that can engage in sustained social interactions with humans necessitates a focus on socioaffective alignment [3]. This involves understanding how AI systems can behave within the social and psychological ecosystem co-created with their users [3].

Addressing these dynamics involves resolving key intrapersonal dilemmas, including balancing immediate versus long-term well-being, protecting autonomy, and managing AI companionship alongside the desire to preserve human social bonds [3]. By framing these challenges through a notion of basic psychological needs, we seek AI systems that support, rather than exploit, our fundamental nature as social and emotional beings [3].

One area of research focuses on the design of conversational agents (CAs) that can provide support and guidance to users, particularly in sensitive areas such as mental and sexual health [5]. However, the use of CAs in these contexts raises safety concerns, as adolescents are increasingly using CAs for interactive knowledge discovery on sensitive topics [5]. Unintended risks have been documented with adolescents' interactions with AI-based CAs, such as being exposed to inappropriate content, false information, and/or being given advice that is detrimental to their mental and physical well-being [5]. Therefore, it is critical to establish guardrails for the safe evolution of AI-based CAs for adolescents [5].

The perception of AI agents can also be influenced by the way they are presented to users [11]. For example, studies have shown that students' perceptions of conversational agents like Alexa can change through programming their own conversational agents in week-long AI education workshops [11]. Students felt Alexa was more intelligent and felt closer to Alexa after the workshops [11]. These findings highlight the importance of careful consideration of personification, transparency, playfulness, and utility when designing CAs for learning contexts [11].

A variety of technical approaches are being explored to ensure the safety and reliability of AI agents. These approaches can be broadly categorized into several areas, including:

One emerging paradigm for safe AI deployment is structured access [17]. Instead of openly disseminating AI systems, developers facilitate controlled, arm's length interactions with their AI systems [17]. The aim is to prevent dangerous AI capabilities from being widely accessible, whilst preserving access to AI capabilities that can be used safely [17].

Another approach involves focusing on non-agentic AI systems, such as Scientist AI [6]. This system is designed to explain the world from observations, as opposed to taking actions in it to imitate or please humans [6]. It comprises a world model that generates theories to explain data and a question-answering inference machine [6]. Both components operate with an explicit notion of uncertainty to mitigate the risks of overconfident predictions [6].

Many real-world problems involve multiple AI agents interacting with each other and with human users [7]. Designing safe and effective multi-agent systems is therefore a critical area of research [7].

One challenge in multi-agent systems is ensuring that AI agents can cooperate and coordinate their actions to achieve common goals [13]. The tragedy of the commons illustrates a fundamental social dilemma where individual rational actions lead to collectively undesired outcomes, threatening the sustainability of shared resources [13]. AI agents can be leveraged to enhance cooperation in public goods games, moving beyond traditional regulatory approaches to using AI as facilitators of cooperation [13].

Another challenge is ensuring that AI agents can coexist and evolve harmoniously in shared environments without creating chaos [7]. Existing multi-agent frameworks, such as multi-agent systems and game theory, are largely limited to predefined rules and static objective structures [7]. A shift toward the emergent, self-organizing, and context-aware nature of these systems is needed [7].

The development and deployment of safe AI agents raise a number of ethical considerations [2]. These include questions of fairness, transparency, accountability, and the potential for bias [2].

One key ethical challenge is ensuring that AI systems are fair and do not discriminate against any group or individual [2]. This requires careful attention to the data used to train AI systems, as well as the algorithms and models used to make decisions [2].

Transparency is also essential for building trust in AI systems [16]. Users need to understand how AI systems work, how they make decisions, and what data they are using [16]. This requires developing AI systems that are explainable and interpretable, as well as providing users with clear and accessible information about the system's behavior [16].

Accountability is another critical ethical consideration [4]. When AI systems cause harm, it is important to establish who is responsible and how they can be held accountable [4]. This requires clear lines of responsibility, as well as mechanisms for redress and compensation [4].

The potential for bias in AI systems is a significant concern [2]. AI systems can inherit biases from the data they are trained on, or from the algorithms and models used to make decisions [2]. This can lead to unfair or discriminatory outcomes, particularly for marginalized groups [2]. Therefore, it is crucial to develop methods for detecting and mitigating bias in AI systems [2].

Governance is essential for ensuring the responsible development and deployment of AI agents [15]. This includes establishing standards, regulations, and best practices for the design, development, and use of AI systems [15]. It also includes creating mechanisms for oversight and accountability, such as independent review boards and regulatory agencies [15].

One approach to AI governance involves progressive decentralization [15]. Current approaches to AI governance often fall short in anticipating a future where AI agents manage critical tasks [15]. Cryptoeconomic incentives can help design decentralized governance systems that allow AI agents to autonomously interact and exchange value while ensuring human oversight via progressive decentralization [15].

Despite significant progress in the design of safe AI agents, several research gaps and challenges remain. These include:

Looking ahead, the future of safe AI design will likely involve a multi-faceted approach that combines technical innovation with ethical considerations and robust governance frameworks. This will require collaboration among researchers, developers, policymakers, and the public to ensure that AI systems are designed and deployed in a way that benefits society as a whole.

Future research should focus on developing more sophisticated methods for value alignment, robust safety mechanisms, and methods for ensuring the fairness, transparency, and accountability of AI systems [4, 8, 2]. It will also be essential to develop governance frameworks that can adapt to the rapid pace of AI innovation and that can effectively address the ethical challenges posed by these technologies [15].

==================================================