“Blocking live failures with synchronous monitors” by James Lucassen, Adam Kaufman

“Blocking live failures with synchronous monitors” by James Lucassen, Adam Kaufman

From Redwood Research Blog by Redwood Research

March 30, 2026 · 7 min

About this episode

The episode discusses the importance of monitoring in AI control schemes, focusing on the differences between detection and prevention goals and the implications of monitor latency.

A common element in many AI control schemes is monitoring – using some model to review actions taken by an untrusted model in order to catch dangerous actions if they occur. Monitoring can serve two different goals. The first is detection: identifying misbehavior so you can understand it and prevent similar actions from happening in the future. For instance, some monitoring at AI companies is already used to identify behaviors like complying with misuse requests, reward hacking, and hallucination. The second goal is prevention: identifying misbehavior in order to mitigate the harmful effects of the particular action. For instance, constitutional classifiers are used by Anthropic to detect and prevent jailbreaks, and Claude Code auto mode prevents destructive mistakes in real time. The latency requirements for monitoring are different depending on whether the goal is detection or prevention. If the goal is detection, it's fine for there to be substantial latency in the monitor. But if the goal is prevention, then the monitor needs to trigger quickly, so that damage can be prevented or recovered from. In the extreme, monitors can run synchronously – after an action is generated by…

Topics covered

  • AI control schemes
  • monitoring
  • detection
  • prevention
  • synchronous monitors

Keywords

  • AI
  • monitoring latency
  • constitutional classifiers
  • LLM

Mentioned in this episode

Products: Anthropic, Claude Code

More episodes of Redwood Research Blog

Explore listener stats, chart rankings, contacts and more on the Redwood Research Blog podcast page.