Top AI Firms Earn Failing Grades on FLI Safety Index

Is AI safety grading a necessary accountability tool or an oversimplification of a genuinely complex field?
Top AI Firms Earn Failing Grades on FLI Safety Index
Above: A smartphone screen displays a folder containing AI applications on Feb. 6. Image credit: Samuel Boivin/NurPhoto/Getty Images

The Spin


Establishment-critical narrative

Nine of the biggest AI labs just got graded on safety and governance — and not one passed. Even more alarmingly, four abandoned pledges they made in existential risk. This is what happens when competitive pressure meets self-policing. Frontier AI buyers can't just take model cards at face value anymore; they need hard answers on risk thresholds, access to external testing and incident reporting before deploying these systems.

Pro-establishment narrative

AI safety is a complex, evolving field with no universal standard — terms like alignment, red-teaming and risk thresholds mean different things to different developers. Grading frontier labs on governance without accounting for the technical nuance behind safeguards, evaluations and deployment contexts oversimplifies a deeply layered challenge.


Metaculus Prediction


Public Figures


The Controversies



Go Deeper

© 2026 Improve the News Foundation. All rights reserved.Version 7.7.2

© 2026 Improve the News Foundation.

All rights reserved.

Version 7.7.2