How to Avoid Debate: Scalable AI Safety via Doubly-Efficient Interactive Proofs
Summary
This paper proposes single-prover interactive proofs for AI safety verification, avoiding the need for debate between two competing models, and extends the approach to oracle-aided computations.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 07/07/26, 04:35 AM
# How to Avoid Debate: Scalable AI Safety via Doubly-Efficient Interactive Proofs
Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.03561](https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.03561)
[View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.03561)
> Abstract:As AI models continue to develop powerful capabilities, it becomes critical that we are able to verify that their output is aligned with our intentions\. A recent line of work focuses on verification via debate, a model of interactive proofs where two competing powerful provers, or AI models, debate each other to convince a weak verifier, or a human, of the correctness of their claim\. However, debate assumes that the two AI models possess equal abilities and that one of them is truthful, which may not be realistic\. In this work, we show \\emph\{how to avoid debate\}: we initiate the study of \\emph\{single\-prover\} interactive proofs for AI safety\. Prior results in single\-prover interactive proofs do not immediately carry over to the AI safety setting: for example, they do not work when the computation has access to an oracle, such as to human judgment or an external database such as the web\. We present doubly\-efficient single\-prover interactive proofs and arguments for oracle\-aided computations \(also known as relativizing proofs\), in the settings where \(1\) the computation is robust, in the sense that the output does not change if at most a small fraction of the answers to oracle queries are incorrect, or \(2\) the oracle is a low\-degree polynomial\. These results suggest that interactive verification is possible even without debate, under structured or noise\-tolerant oracle access\.
## Submission history
From: Zoe Xi \[[view email](https://arxiv.org/show-email/c74041ac/2607.03561)\] **\[v1\]**Fri, 3 Jul 2026 18:49:20 UTC \(6,625 KB\)Similar Articles
AI safety via debate
OpenAI proposes a novel approach to AI safety where two AI agents debate each other while a human judge evaluates their arguments, allowing humans to supervise AI systems whose behavior is too complex to directly understand. The method leverages debate and adversarial reasoning to align advanced AI with human values and preferences.
Verifiable Agentic Infrastructure: Proof-Derived Authorization for Sovereign AI Systems
This paper introduces a Distributed Trust Framework (DTF) for verifiable, proof-derived authorization in autonomous AI agent systems, addressing the risks of identity-centric permissions by requiring justification proofs and consensus for execution.
Improving verifiability in AI development
OpenAI publishes a report on mechanisms to improve verifiability in AI development, addressing how stakeholders can verify organizations' claims about AI system properties and safety practices.
Verifiable AI inference
The article discusses the concept of verifiable AI inference, exploring methods like trusted attestation and cryptographic proofs to ensure the authenticity and provenance of AI-generated outputs without rerunning the model.
Open ai
The article discusses the industry consensus that AI is becoming extremely capable but still faces reliability issues for high-stakes tasks, emphasizing that current systems optimize for plausibility rather than guaranteed truth, and that the path forward involves layered verification systems rather than a single perfect model.