Swaptik Chowdhury
AI tools to empower advocates Post-AGI transition/Transformative AI Artificial sentience Macrostrategy, philosophy, and cause prioritisation

Swaptik Chowdhury

Mapping pathways to AGI loss-of-control

RAND Corporation | Dun and Bradstreet

Bio

I’m a computational social scientist developing evaluation benchmarks for AI behavior and agency, and applying those tools to long-term CBRN risk. I support mentees interested in grounded, technically informed approaches to AI safety governance.

Mentee must-haves/nice-to-haves

I’m looking for a highly motivated mentee who can commit at least 10 hours per week and is serious about producing a meaningful research output. We will treat the project as a structured weekly sprint, beginning with a 30-minute check-in where we define goals, tasks, and deliverables for the week. The aim is to work toward a clear MVP-style research output, ideally in the form of a short conference-style paper, conceptual framework, or policy brief.

Because this project depends heavily on clarity and momentum, strong communication and reliability are essential. We will finalize project scoping in week one and then follow consistent sprint-style progress cycles.

Must-haves: a) Prior experience conducting academic or policy literature reviews b) Comfort using LLMs (via API or interface) for synthesis, brainstorming, and structured analysis c) Basic understanding of AI governance, alignment, or emerging AGI risk debates d) Some Python coding experience, especially for organizing data, building diagrams, or prototyping simple tools e) Ability to work independently, take initiative, and propose ideas or solutions

Strongly preferred “good-to-have” skills: a) Experience with systems thinking b) Basic understanding of AI governance, alignment, or emerging AGI risk debates c) Ability to create clear visualizations (diagrams, flowcharts, conceptual maps) d) Comfort summarizing complex technical or policy material into concise insights e)Familiarity with scenario development, assumption-based planning, and backcasting (or willingness to learn quickly)

Mentee role

Mentees will be co-researchers, helping construct pathway maps, gather insights from stakeholders, and develop analytical or visual representations of the system failures that lead to high-risk AGI futures. I view this as 60% mentorship and 40% collaboration. I expect a conference presentation and a technical paper/expert insights from this study

       a) Depending on their interests, mentees may work in one or more tracks:
       b) Research & Futures Analysis: Reviewing literature on AGI risk, governance failures, and socio-technical system collapse.
       c) Pathway Mapping: Turning stakeholder insights and research into structured causal pathways and decision trees.
       d) Visualization & Communication: Designing clear diagrams, narrative futures, or interactive tools.
       e) Governance & Policy: Translating pathway insights into recommendations for policymakers or civil-society groups.

No technical AI development or dual-use content is involved. This project focuses on system design, governance, foresight, and qualitative modeling/systems modelling.

❓ Sample mentee tasks

Conduct literature scans on AGI loss-of-control and existential risk governance

Summarize key institutional “failure points” (e.g., regulatory lag, oversight gaps, power concentration)

Help build causal-loop diagrams and pathway maps

Analyze historical analogs of technological loss-of-control (financial systems, nuclear command, bio-regulation)

Assist in designing a virtual backcasting session with policymakers or domain experts

Create visual representations (flowcharts, system maps, timelines) of pathways

Draft short scenario narratives for possible 2035–2050 AGI trajectories

Co-develop the public-facing output (report, deck, or interactive tool)

Mentor support

I am available to support the entire project pipeline. For example,

1. Problem Definition: I can help the mentee clarify their research question and scope the project so it’s feasible. We can refine the focus together to identify a clear end-goal and deliverable.

2. Research Design: I can guide the mentee in choosing appropriate methods

3. Research Execution: I can provide feedback on drafts, diagrams, and conceptual models as they build them.

4. Synthesis & Analysis: I can support the mentee in integrating findings into coherent insights and recommendations.

Questions for applicants

  1. Literature Review Task (400 words max)

Provide a concise literature review identifying the major risk/unsafe futures associated with misaligned AGI futures. Your review should focus on the key risk categories discussed in academic, policy, or technical sources (e.g., governance autonomy, goal misalignment, rapid capability escalation, emergent agency, systemic power accumulation).

Please do not spend more than 45 minutes on this task. The goal is to gauge your ability to:

                      a)rapidly locate relevant sources,
                      b)synthesize complex material, and
                      c)communicate key insights clearly.
                      d)You may cite sources informally.

2) Critical Reflection Task (300 words max)

Based on the literature you reviewed in Question 1, identify what is missing from current understandings of AGI misalignment. You may choose one of two approaches:

            a) Discuss gaps, limitations, or blind spots in the academic or policy literature; or
            b) Identify implicit or explicit assumptions the literature makes about misalignment, AGI development, governance capacity, human rationality, system behavior, or future trajectories.

The aim is to understand how you critique and extend existing research.

Mentor-led project

Mapping pathways to AGI loss-of-control

This project explores one of the most widely recognized AI futures concerns: a misaligned or partially uncontrollable AGI gaining autonomy faster than humans can respond. Rather than focusing on technical alignment research, this project examines the social, institutional, and infrastructural pathways through which loss-of-control scenarios could emerge.

Using a combination of participatory backcasting, pathway mapping, and scenario analysis, we will work backward from a future in which AGI autonomy has exceeded human oversight. The goal is to identify:

              a) Key decision points (“forks in the road”) where societies could lose or retain control
              b) Pathways through which misaligned behavior could compound into existential-scale risks
              c) Governance, institutional, and socio-technical vulnerabilities that accelerate or mitigate those risks
              d) “Red lines” that tool developers should not cross without safety assurances
              e) Early-warning indicators that existing oversight systems may be insufficient

This is an early-stage research project building toward a publicly accessible framework for identifying AGI loss-of-control pathways, suitable for policymakers, researchers, and civil-society organizations.

The expected Output is a set of participatory backcasting maps tracing pathways to AGI loss of control.