Claim LD06-SL-C27 (v1.0)
Surveying 104 papers and six industry cases, researchers found that AI red-teaming is “an unstructured procedure with undefined scope” with no unified protocols for reporting results, and argued that treating it as a cure for every risk verges on security theater.
Provenance and status
- Claim type
- ESTIMATE + INTERPRETATION (as printed: “ESTIMATE / INTERPRETATION”)
- Publication status
- ELIGIBLE (INTERPRETATION_LABEL) (as printed: “ELIGIBLE WITH INTERPRETATION LABEL”)
- Verification state
- CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY (as printed: “CONTENT VERIFIED”; verified by: UNKNOWN)
- Does not license
- A judgement on any particular red-teaming exercise
- Source (field 6, as printed)
- Feffer, Sinha, Deng, Lipton & Heidari, “Red-Teaming for Generative AI: Silver Bullet or Security Theater?,” AIES 2024, arXiv:2401.15897
- Source type (field 7)
- PEER_REVIEWED_CONFERENCE_PAPER (as printed: “Peer-reviewed conference paper”)
- Institutional position
- Independent academic
- Maturity (claim evidence / publication maturity)
- EMERGING (as printed: “EMERGING”)
- Recorded date
- 2026-10-15
- Currentness / correction
- This is the current version. No correction or concern relation is recorded on its Sources.
Version
Pinned version v1.0 (entry LD06-SL-C27--v1.0) — this page never floats to newer evidence.
This pinned version is also the current version.
Pinned Sources (field 6, version-specific)
- “Feffer, Sinha, Deng, Lipton & Heidari, “Red-Teaming for Generative AI: Silver Bullet or Security Theater?,” AIES 2024, arXiv:2401.15897” → SRC-SL-FEFFER-ET-AL-RED-TEAMING-AIES-2024--v1.0 — Feffer, Sinha, Deng, Lipton & Heidari, “Red-Teaming for Generative AI: Silver Bullet or Security Theater?,” AIES 2024, arXiv:2401.15897; class PEER_REVIEWED_CONFERENCE_PAPER (explicit public provenance pin)
All 25 canonical Claim fields (raw values and normalized values)
| # | Canonical field | Canonical value (verbatim) | Normalized (Claim Value Vocabulary v1.0.2) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CLAIM ID | LD06-SL-C27 | — |
| 2 | PUBLIC-FACING CLAIM | Surveying 104 papers and six industry cases, researchers found that AI red-teaming is “an unstructured procedure with undefined scope” with no unified protocols for reporting results, and argued that treating it as a cure for every risk verges on security theater. | — |
| 3 | CLAIM TYPE | ESTIMATE / INTERPRETATION | base_types: ESTIMATE, INTERPRETATION |
| 4 | RESEARCH STRAND | C — Evaluation in governance, audits and red-teaming | — |
| 5 | MATURITY | EMERGING | states: EMERGING |
| 6 | SOURCE | Feffer, Sinha, Deng, Lipton & Heidari, “Red-Teaming for Generative AI: Silver Bullet or Security Theater?,” AIES 2024, arXiv:2401.15897 | source_ids: SRC-SL-FEFFER-ET-AL-RED-TEAMING-AIES-2024 |
| 7 | SOURCE TYPE | Peer-reviewed conference paper | classes: PEER_REVIEWED_CONFERENCE_PAPER |
| 8 | INSTITUTIONAL POSITION | Independent academic | — |
| 9 | SCOPE | Red-teaming of generative AI, to 2024 | — |
| 10 | DESIGN | Literature survey and case studies | — |
| 11 | SAMPLE / DATASET | 104 papers; six industry case studies | — |
| 12 | MODEL / TOOL / VERSION | Generative AI systems in the surveyed work | — |
| 13 | COMPARATOR | None | — |
| 14 | MAIN RESULT | 69 of 104 papers concern dissentive risks; 42 use brute-force plus AI methods; no unified reporting protocols; developer responses to published jailbreaks muted and mixed | — |
| 15 | INFERENTIAL TARGET | Whether red-teaming is a reliable evaluation method | — |
| 16 | DOES NOT LICENSE | A judgement on any particular red-teaming exercise | — |
| 17 | VERIFICATION STATE | CONTENT VERIFIED | state: CONTENT_VERIFIED_PRIMARY · verified_by: UNKNOWN |
| 18 | LIMITATIONS | Literature to 2024; the conclusion is the authors’ argument | — |
| 19 | CONTRADICTORY / SUPPORTING SOURCES | Practitioners also separate red-teaming from measurement | — |
| 20 | GEOGRAPHY / LANGUAGE | Not checked / English | — |
| 21 | DISTRIBUTIONAL LEDGER | Not analysed in this claim | — |
| 22 | R01 / FIELD-MAP LINKS | LD-06, D4b | — |
| 23 | WHAT WOULD CHANGE THIS CLAIM? | Standard red-teaming protocols with reported coverage | — |
| 24 | PUBLICATION STATUS | ELIGIBLE WITH INTERPRETATION LABEL | state: ELIGIBLE · qualifiers: INTERPRETATION_LABEL |
| 25 | RECORDED DATE | 2026-10-15 | — |
Field 22 references resolved against Field Map v0.2: LD-06 (LIVING_DEBATE); D4b (SUB_AREA)
Cited by Living Debate versions
Research-of-record provenance
Materialized by sociolens-materializer 0.6.0 at 2026-09-28T20:00:00.000Z; normalization contract SocioLens — Claim Value Vocabulary v1.0.2 — Pre-Spike Materialization Contract (v1.0.2). Content seal SHA-256 9042aeba88c1debe44e629722295b2b06ef0962fa865cb99c95e0e13eae726ef.
Repository-authored inputs (not Drive exports)
- SocioLens claim — LD06-SL-C27 v1.0 (v1.0) — written in the SocioLens repository by Project Lead (Claude, AI) on 2026-10-15; no Drive identity exists. Authority: AGENTS.md "Authority" (the Project Lead decides research content within the research-integrity rules) and the Owner's choice in the SocioLens project chat on 15 October 2026 to build the LD-06 debate; a new Claim, first version, written from the project's LD-06 source notes, checked against full texts or official abstracts. Block “ENTRY 27 — LD06-SL-C27” SHA-256
8d186b2ee062e2f944aac28451ce77704b7e4ebceeb6091e0835286bc650174b; fixturefixtures/authored/claims/LD06-SL-C27--v1.0.
Builder decisions (not Drive data)
- VERSION = v1.0 — basis: Claim version taken from the repository-authored claim fixture version (SocioLens claim — LD06-SL-C27 v1.0); the first version of a new Claim of the LD-06 debate
- CURRENT_POINTER = true — basis: repository-authored claim "SocioLens claim — LD06-SL-C27 v1.0" (Project Lead (Claude, AI), 2026-10-15); basis: AGENTS.md "Authority" (the Project Lead decides research content within the research-integrity rules) and the Owner's choice in the SocioLens project chat on 15 October 2026 to build the LD-06 debate; a new Claim, first version, written from the project's LD-06 source notes, checked against full texts or official abstracts
- FIELD_6_SOURCE_REFERENCE = SRC-SL-FEFFER-ET-AL-RED-TEAMING-AIES-2024--v1.0 — basis: field 6 of ENTRY 27 — LD06-SL-C27 cites "Feffer, Sinha, Deng, Lipton & Heidari, “Red-Teaming for Generative AI: Silver Bullet or Security Theater?,” AIES 2024, arXiv:2401.15897"; the only field-6 segment of this ClaimVersion's repository-authored ledger block.
- SOURCE_PROVENANCE_PIN = SRC-SL-FEFFER-ET-AL-RED-TEAMING-AIES-2024--v1.0 — basis: explicit version-pinned public provenance of this ClaimVersion (Amendment v1.2 §6): the pinned field-6 Source record "Feffer, Sinha, Deng, Lipton & Heidari, “Red-Teaming for Generative AI: Silver Bullet or Security Theater?,” AIES 2024, arXiv:2401.15897".