This sounds like a very successful retreat! Congratulations to the org team. I also appreciate you doing this writeup; postmortems like this make a great learning tool for other teams.
Organizers have to sacrifice their ability to participate
Yep, that about matches how I've experienced organizing events. Thank you for doing it anyway.
Thanks! This was our first big event (>10), so it was kind of a trial by fire. Glad that we could pull it off (obviously with the help of the community). Lots of learnings to digest and incorporate for the next iteration.
This is a retrospective analysis from conducting an AI alignment retreat for a week in Ooty, India.
We hope this report will be useful to other organisers planning similar events. This is also aimed for those who could not make it for this event and want to know what happened.
We welcome feedback on how we can improve.
If you are interested in collaborating on any of these projects or want to learn more, please contact aditya or bhishma!
This document is a work in progress, depending on the interest, we can coordinate with participants and get more details
Objectives
Key Takeaways
Achievements we are proud of!
Gallery
Participants busy vibe coding
Bhishma and Aditya’s talk on intro to AI safety
View from Cairn hill
Hiking
Nature mindfulness
Sam’s intro to ML and transformers talk
Discussion session on intentional vs gradual disempowerment risks from AI
Adiga’s session on live conversation threads
Bhishma working on AGI doc
Aditya’s talk about his experience in MAPLE
Movie night (The man from earth)
Intro to AI safety talk
Hiking in the woods
What happened, the nitty gritties
A zoomed out view
Calendar - Week View
The specific events that happened are listed below,
Event Name
Details
What Went Well
What could have been better
5 min presentations on any topic
The Details
Format, Motivation, Outputs
Lightning Talks
Bhishma talked about LARPing, how we tend to roleplay, get stuck in our narratives unable to take existential risks seriously. He called for action based on sincerely taking stock of what is happening. Aditya talked about friendship, how it showed him the existence of entities that cannot be reified, how thinking the map (representation) is the territory makes it harder to access the territory.
Threads - a Live Interface
As part of the larger ecosystem of Live Machinery. We had the creator of Live Conversation Threads - Aditya Adiga explaining his app and testing it on most of the events and we got to see a graph representation of all the tangents we went on appear live on the screen
The app allowed for fact checking of claims extracted from the conversation to happen easily
This is a work in progress but we had great feedback, enthusiasm about how this enhances the quality of discourse, allowing for us to quickly go back recursively on what what tree of topics led to the current crux
The future direction of this project will be about extracting out “metaformalisms” from natural conversations between researchers.
So currently, formalisms are defined in a universal, context-independent way. This means that any definition of (say) deception that is static will not be able to keep pace with the adaptive nature of intelligent AI systems.
treats safety formalisms as live, context-sensitive artifacts generated directly from conversations between humans, rather than as static, universal definitions that are abstract and substrate independent.
This will be successful because it fundamentally shortens the feedback loop for AI safety. Instead of a months-long cycle where researchers publish a paper defining a threat, our tool enables a near-real-time process where
Insight: Researchers identify a new, specific evasive behavior in a conversation.
Formalization and Extraction: Our tool immediately helps them model their proposed solution directly from that discussion.
Refinement & Composition: That artifact can then be immediately modified with a “Tuner” interface or merged with other insights using a “Composer”, enabling a wider creative search
Deployment & Distribution: The resulting "meta-formalism" (context-specific rule) is shared on a platform where it can be quickly integrated into monitoring systems, with credit flowing back to all contributors.
This ecosystem allows our safety infrastructure to evolve at the speed of conversation, not the speed of publishing, meaning our defenses are able to keep up with the speed of AI systems' improvement.
AI risk table top exercise (TTX)
We (bhishma, Badri, Alisha) built a LLM simulated TTX game which simulates how various stakeholders react to a complex scenario of AI misinformation during an election. It is a game designed to test your strategic thinking and reveal how complex systems respond to pressure.
In this AI-powered simulation, you'll choose a role and face an escalating scenario. You must make tough choices with limited resources to advance your secret objectives while maintaining public trust. An AI Game Master generates the story, controls the other characters, and shapes the consequences of your actions, ensuring a unique challenge every time.
Repo: https://github.com/bhi5hmaraj/ai-risk-ttx
Game: ai-risk-ttx.vercel.app
Lexicon Forge
Aditya picked the task of translating light novels (chinese, etc) into english as the concrete task and built the translation workbench that automated the scraping of raws, fan translations, aligning the data, cleaning it up, fine tuning models, inline commenting on trial runs allowing for iterative prompt engineering, n shot prompting perfecting a custom translation tailormade for your personal vocabulary level, tradeoffs around familiarity with the culture, and thereby creating an interface where AI systems are backgrounded and remain sensitive to our preferences in an ongoing way. The vision of pluralistic versions of any novel showcased the groundless future where there is no single objectively correct true translation.
S vs R debate
S was talking about recursive self improvement happening soon. The intelligence explosion happens soon after we have AI scientists that can run in parallel, collaborate, with shared memory, generate many hypotheses, run at faster speed, easy self modification, replication.
R pointed out how the capabilities gains coming from scaling pretraining seemed to be saturating (cannot justify capex expenditure to scale training runs) and the capabilities unlocked by RL, test time inference are more spiky in nature. So the specific threat model of us being like puppies compared to the machine god seems more unlikely.
The key insight from R was that of stacked S curves where in nature we do not have exponentials and the question is will we keep finding new paradigms, breakthroughs to sustain the climb to superintelligence.
The crux here seemed to be R saying that AI intelligence is not the kind of thing that you can stack together can climb the curve. The gains from having a server of einsteins isn't taking us to ASI where the delta is same as insect to human level.
Threat Models Debate
One interesting insight was how we are already seeing smaller cultures being disempowered, their way of life is being eaten by “modernity” with internet, english, fast food crowding out their rituals, norms and beliefs that are more sustainable and in harmony with the environment
With AI models getting better we expect supply chains to be redirected to satisfy those industries that enable inference.
Humans lose economic and hence political bargaining chips
It becomes increasingly hard to coordinate as we face psychological disempowerment, breaking social cohesion, algorithms farm our attention, intimacy, connection and we find it hard to cohere around any consensus reality
so rather than risks from a singular, unipolar superintelligence it was such risks from pervasive moderate intelligence that formed the core of our concerns
AGI Doc Results
Some interesting questions/discussion points that came up were,
———-
Do comment which sessions sound interesting and we will add more details above.
What could have been better
Blameless Postmortem
Problem Category
Specific Issues
Impact on Retreat
Lessons learnt
• Seating blocked pathways
• Insufficient planning for messy activities
• Lighting issues, bathroom access problems
• No labels for personal items
Get more help through volunteers (with compensations) and delegate responsibilities - ops, events, community health, etc.
• Unclear start/end times
• Insufficient breaks between sessions
• No technical prerequisites led to context gaps
• Repeated explanations of basic concepts
• High-context discussions excluded newcomers
• Inefficient use of group time
event programming needs more careful thought
• Planned events vs emerging interests conflict
• Individual needs vs group coordination balance
• A lot of time was spent in meta discussions about the structure of some events
• Too many back-to-back discussions
• Polarizing "touch grass" breaks
Wanting to both participate and manage logistics
Crux on format adjustment in real time
Key Insight: Most problems stem from underestimating operational complexity and assuming flexibility could substitute for good planning for operations, when in reality both structured systems AND adaptive capacity are needed.
Looking Forward
Despite the operational challenges, we're genuinely happy with how the retreat unfolded. The authentic conversations, concrete project outputs, and lasting friendships that emerged validated our core hypothesis - that bringing together thoughtful people to work on AI safety challenges creates valuable synthesis that wouldn't happen otherwise.
The retreat succeeded at its fundamental goal: building community and advancing our collective thinking about preparing for an AI-transformed world. Participants left with new collaborators, clearer models of AI risks and opportunities, strategies to cope with these uncertain times and practical experience with current AI tools. Several ongoing projects and partnerships formed organically, suggesting the connections will outlast the week itself.
We learned an enormous amount, perhaps most importantly about the underappreciated complexity of event logistics and group facilitation. The gap between "smart people talking about important things" and "productive collaborative work environment" is larger than we initially estimated, but now we have concrete ideas for bridging it.
Moving forward, we're planning smaller, more focused events in Bangalore to test specific formats and build on these learnings. These will let us experiment with solutions to audience heterogeneity, better logistics systems, and improved activity pacing in a lower-stakes environment.
Our goal is to incorporate all these insights into a significantly improved retreat next year - one that maintains the genuine truth-seeking culture and the energy we achieved, while providing the infrastructure that lets participants focus entirely on the work that matters.
The AI safety and rationality community in India is small but growing. Events like this help us find each other, coordinate better, and build the local capacity we'll need as AI capabilities scale. We're excited to continue this work and grateful to everyone who joined us in Ooty to make it happen!
If you're interested in future events or want to collaborate on similar community-building initiatives, feel free to reach out. The retreat materials and session notes are available for other organizers looking to run similar events adhering to participant's privacy.