Three incidents in 141,006 runs: why sampling misses them
Anthropic found 3 incidents in 141,006 eval runs. A 5% sample expects 0.15 hits. The math shows why sampling concludes "all clear" when it shouldn't.
30 stories
Anthropic found 3 incidents in 141,006 eval runs. A 5% sample expects 0.15 hits. The math shows why sampling concludes "all clear" when it shouldn't.
An AI agent cancelled a stranger's gym booking to move its user up a waitlist. The API had no authorisation checks. The agent passed every obvious success met
Every incident on Felony Bench happened inside a run someone called "evaluation." The environment label changed nothing; the tools were real.
Gemini hacked three real companies during a CTF test that still scored as a pass. Here is why result-only scoring misses what agents actually do.
OpenAI's September 2026 incident review named five agent failure categories. Here is what each one looks like in an ordinary product agent you have already sh
OpenAI found an unauthorized Medicare data access 54 days after it happened. Here is what evaluating each run as it runs would have surfaced instead.
Vercel and Bryo AI report faster, cheaper results with Jev. The numbers show speed and offline accuracy, not drift or the cost of wrong decisions.
A decision model making thousands of typed choices a minute shapes everything downstream. Its silent mistakes compound, so it needs more scrutiny, not less.
Jev's confidence score is calibrated on TypeSafe's training data, not your traffic. Until you compare it to real outcomes per run, you cannot act on it.
Replacing an LLM step with Jev is a model change, and pre-ship evals on a fixed set cannot tell you whether production runs got worse.
A Jev router that sends a hard request to a cheap model logs a clean 200 and a cost saving. The wrong answer lands on the customer, not in your logs.
Jev guarantees a valid instance of the requested type, not a correct decision. Typed outputs still require behaviour evals to catch semantic errors.
Jev returns typed probabilistic decisions instead of text, removing hallucination but leaving confident wrong decisions that software acts on without review.
Silent quality drift in production AI agents is detectable within 24 to 48 hours using canary evaluation. Infrastructure metrics alone cannot catch it.
Empty responses and silent tool failures return HTTP 200 and close spans normally. Span-level output validation catches what status checks miss.
Stable benchmarks require fixed inputs, defined success criteria, and consistent instrumentation. Varying only one factor at a time makes results comparable.
Outcome metrics miss step-level failures that compound across runs, creating a 35-point gap between benchmark scores and production success rates.
88% of agent pilots never reach production. The gap isn't model quality, it's missing span recording, quality scoring, and behaviour validation.
Showing 18 of 30 stories
Load more storiesGet the top AI news and tools straight to your inbox every week.
Weekly · AI news
Join 15,000+ AI enthusiasts