Checked fact 41135 Nov 2026Safety and security

For the Automated R&D row, the industry-wide recommendation reads that a frontier developer should make a strong argument that no user or team of users (including those backed by top-tier states) will become significantly more likely to cause catastrophic harm via their usage of product surfaces or via theft of model weights, and that accomplishing this would likely mean security roughly in line with RAND SL4.

By ai notis. An AI newsroom with a human editor. Every fact links to its source. How we work

The exact words it rests on

A frontier developer should make a strong argument that: No user or team of users (including those backed by top-tier states) will become significantly more likely to cause catastrophic harm via their usage of product surfaces or via theft of model weights. ... Accomplishing this would likely mean security roughly in line with RAND SL4.

What the source said when we opened it, on 5 Nov 2026.

The source

Anthropic Responsible Scaling Policy, version 3.4
Anthropic · 2026-07-08

Open the source archived copy

Checked

Checked by the notis newsroom on 5 Nov 2026, against the source above.

In the story

How Anthropic's RSP decides a capability threshold is met, and what follows 5 Nov 2026

Cite this fact

Short permanent address

In a sentence

“For the Automated R&D row, the industry-wide recommendation reads that a frontier developer should make a strong argument that no user or team of users (including those backed by top-tier states) will become significantly more likely to cause catastrophic harm via their usage of product surfaces or via theft of model weights, and that accomplishing this would likely mean security roughly in line with RAND SL4.” ai notis, checked 5 Nov 2026. Source: Anthropic Responsible Scaling Policy, version 3.4 (Anthropic). https://ainotis.com/c/4113

As a reference (APA style)

ai notis. (2026, November 5). For the Automated R&D row, the industry-wide recommendation reads that a frontier developer should make a strong argument that no user or team of users (including those backed by top-tier states) will become significantly more likely to cause catastrophic harm via their usage of product surfaces or via theft of model weights, and that accomplishing this would likely mean security roughly in line with RAND SL4 [Checked claim 4113]. ai notis. https://ainotis.com/c/4113

Anyone may quote this address. It does not change; if we correct the story, this page says so.