Streams in this track include hands-on research using machine learning experiments to understand and improve model safety including AI control, interpretability, scalable oversight, evaluations, red-teaming, and robustness. This is the largest track in the program and is defined by its methods rather than any single research agenda. If your primary tool is ML engineering, this is your track.
The track is defined by its methodology more than by any single research agenda. Fellows run ML experiments to understand and improve the safety properties of frontier models, with work spanning interpretability, AI control, scalable oversight, evaluations, red-teaming, robustness, and model organisms of misalignment. The unifying thread is that progress comes from getting hands on real models (training, probing, fine-tuning, measuring) rather than reasoning from first principles alone. This is the largest track in the program and the most common entry point into technical AI safety research.
We are looking for fellows whose primary tool is ML engineering, broadly construed. The essential requirement is the ability to design and run experiments on language models or other deep learning systems and iterate quickly on the results. In practice that usually means strong Python (with and without AI coding tools), comfort with the infrastructure around running models at moderate scale, and enough research taste to know which experiments are worth running. Mission alignment matters: fellows should be able to say why a given line of empirical work meaningfully reduces frontier risk, not just whether it yields a successful publication. Educational background and seniority are weighted lightly here relative to other tracks. Past cohorts have included strong fellows ranging from undergraduates to senior industry researchers.
Fellows are matched to mentors based on fit, and projects are scoped to produce concrete artifacts by program end: papers, evaluation suites, open-source tooling, or technical reports. Target audiences include safety and alignment teams at frontier labs, governments and other evaluation organizations, the broader ML research community.
This stream focuses on representations that underlie how language models generalize, for example representations of personas, goals, or training data components.
1 hour/week meetings + async discussions in Slack threads; can schedule additional meetings ad hoc as needed.
Essential:
Preferred:
We'll go through potential projects at the beginning, and scholars can propose alternatives. Scholars should explore the first week or two, and decide on a project direction in the second week.
We study applications of singular learning theory (SLT) to AI safety, with a focus on interpretability and alignment. Ideal candidates come from a strong technical background in mathematics, physics, computer science, or biology, and aren't afraid to get their hands dirty with ML experiments. We don't expect you to have deep expertise in SLT, but a shallow familiarity will help.
The team will meet weekly together with both mentors. Separately, you will meet 1-on-1 with at least one of the mentors every other week. We conduct our asynchronous communications through an internal Discord server. We expect you to schedule additional pair-programming/debugging calls with other people on the team as needed.
We'll help with research obstacles, including outside of meetings.
If you're interested in working on more of the empirical side, you should have prior experience with ML engineering (at least at the level of a program like ARENA) and prior research experience (potentially in a field outside of ML). A bonus would be prior familiarity with designing and running ML experiments or research specifically in AI safety.
If you're interested in working on more of the theoretical side, you should have prior research experience in a relevant field like mathematics, theoretical physics, or theoretical computer science.
Please make sure that your background and interests are clearly described in your application. By default, we'll be looking for evidence of research ability in the form of publications.
We do not expect you to already be aware of SLT, but if you pass the first round, please prepare by conducting some background reading (see: timaeus.co/learn).
Mentor(s) will talk through project ideas with scholar and suggest several options to choose from.
This stream will focus on monitoring, stress-testing safety methods, and evals, with a focus on risks from scheming AIs. Examples include (black-box) AI control techniques, white-box monitors (probes etc.), chain-of-thought monitoring/faithfulness, building evaluation environments, and stress-testing mitigations.
For each project, we will have a weekly meeting to discuss the overall project direction and prioritize next steps for the upcoming week. On a day-to-day basis, you will discuss experiments and write code with other mentees on the project (though I'm available on Slack for quick feedback between meetings or to address things that are blocking you).
I structure the program around collaborative, team-based research projects. You will work in a small team, on a project from a predefined list. I organize the 12-week program into fast-paced research sprints designed to create and keep research velocity, so you should expect regular deadlines and milestones. I will provide a more detailed schedule and set of milestones at the beginning of the program.
I am looking for scholars with strong machine learning engineering skills, as well as a background in technical research. While I’ll provide weekly guidance on research, I expect scholars to be able to run experiments and decide on low-level details fairly independently most of the time. I’ll propose concrete projects to choose from, so you should not expect to work on your own research idea during MATS. I strongly encourage collaboration within the stream, so you should expect to work in teams of 2-3 scholars on a project, hence good communication and team skills are important.
We will most likely have a joint project selection phase, where we present a list of projects (with the option for scholars to iterate on them). Afterward, each project will have at least one main mentor, but we might also co-mentor some projects.
This stream will focus on monitoring, stress-testing safety methods, and evals, with a focus on risks from scheming AIs. Examples include (black-box) AI control techniques, white-box monitors (probes etc.), chain-of-thought monitoring/faithfulness, building evaluation environments, and stress-testing mitigations.
For each project, we will have a weekly meeting to discuss the overall project direction and prioritize next steps for the upcoming week. On a day-to-day basis, you will discuss experiments and write code with other mentees on the project (though I'm available on Slack for quick feedback between meetings or to address things that are blocking you).
I structure the program around collaborative, team-based research projects. You will work in a small team, on a project from a predefined list. I organize the 12-week program into fast-paced research sprints designed to create and keep research velocity, so you should expect regular deadlines and milestones. I will provide a more detailed schedule and set of milestones at the beginning of the program.
I am looking for fellows with strong machine learning engineering skills, as well as a background in technical research. While I’ll provide weekly guidance on research, I expect fellows to be able to run experiments and decide on low-level details fairly independently most of the time. I’ll propose concrete projects to choose from, so you should not expect to work on your own research idea during MATS. I strongly encourage collaboration within the stream, so you should expect to work in teams of 2-3 fellows on a project, hence good communication and team skills are important.
We will most likely have a joint project selection phase with the other GDM mentors, where we present a list of projects (with the option for fellows to iterate on them). Afterward, each project will have at least one main mentor, but we might also co-mentor some projects.
I'm interested in mentoring projects related to reward hacking and monitoring (agentic) models that produces long and complex trajectories. Scholar will have freedom to propose projects within this scope. Expect 30-60min 1-1 time on zoom.
30min to 1 hour weekly meetings (on zoom) by default for high-level guidance. I'm active on Slack and typically respond within a day for quick questions or conceptual (not code) debugging. Expect async back-and-forth on experiment design and results between meetings. Scholars can also schedule ad-hoc calls if they're stuck or want to brainstorm—just ping me on Slack.
Week 1-2: Mentor will provide high level directions or problems to work on, and scholar will have the freedom to propose specific projects and discuss with mentor.
Week 3: Figure out detailed plan of the project.
I prefer a weekly meeting cadence of at least one research meeting per week, where we discuss results from the previous week and potential next steps, and just generally align ourselves on priorities and stay motivated. I'm also a fan of relatively few meetings, and much more support given asynchronously, so I can think carefully about my responses and help throughout the process.
I have a decent amount of experience on the technical side, and so in the past have had good experiences unblocking scholars when they were stuck on technical obstacles right away (e.g. low-level bugs like memory issues, taking a step back and thinking about alternative approaches, etc). For example, I'm a huge fan of impromptu pair programming sessions to debug things together, and I always learn new things from dropping into someone's workflow. I'm also happy to help clarify things conceptually and just brainstorm together. The two biggest bottlenecks in my experience have been 1) getting stuck on technical obstacles and 2) conceptually understanding the problem we're trying to solve.
I'm open to a wider variety of skillsets, but these would be a big plus:
I would be happy to suggest concrete project ideas and help with brainstorming topic choices, or help guide an existing project that the scholar is interested in. My preference is that the scholar picks a category that overlaps with an area I actively work on so that I can give effective high-level advice.
The MATS Program is a 10-week research fellowship designed to train and support emerging researchers working on AI alignment, transparency and security. Fellows collaborate with world-class mentors, receive dedicated research management support, and join a vibrant community in Berkeley focused on advancing safe and reliable AI. The program provides the structure, resources, and mentorship needed to produce impactful research and launch long-term careers in AI safety.
MATS mentors are leading researchers from a broad range of AI safety, alignment, governance, field-building and security domains. They include academics, industry researchers, and independent experts who guide scholars through research projects, provide feedback, and help shape each scholar’s growth as a researcher. The mentors represent expertise in areas such as:
Key dates
Application:
The main program will then run from September 28th to December 4th, with the extension phase for accepted fellows beginning in December.
MATS accepts applicants from diverse academic and professional backgrounds - from machine learning, mathematics, and computer science to policy, economics, physics, cognitive science, biology, and public health, as well as founders, operators, and field-builders without traditional research backgrounds. The primary requirements are strong motivation to contribute to AI safety and evidence of technical aptitude, research potential, or relevant operational experience. Prior AI safety experience is helpful but not required.
Applicants submit a general application, applying to various tracks (Empirical, Theory, Strategy & Forecasting, Policy & Governance, Systems Security, Biosecurity, Founding & Field-Building.
In stage 2, applicants apply to streams within those tracks as well as completing track specific evaluations.
After a centralized review period, applicants who are advanced will then undergo additional evaluations depending on the preferences of the streams they've applied to before doing final interviews and receiving offers.
For more information on how to get into MATS, please look at this page.