/ Public observatory on AI
ITAITA
Menu
MapCompareNewsCountriesIncidentsConnectionsAI labsState and AIOver timeHow it worksLeggi questa pagina in italiano

← All AI labs

OpenAI

Conflict of interest. This site uses Claude, by Anthropic, to read and summarise texts; Anthropic is one of the companies on this page. Claude gives no judgements or rankings. The categories of the Seoul safety frameworks (e.g. «does not cover severe risks») come from Claude's reading of the documents: the document is linked on each company's page.

1 · Who it is

Headquarters
United States · United States
Why it is on this page
  • signed the Seoul commitments (May 2024)
  • is rated by the FLI AI Safety Index
  • trained at least one model above 10²⁵ FLOP, the threshold above which the EU AI Act presumes a “systemic risk” (Epoch AI)
Latest releases
70 models released in the last 24 months
  • GPT-6.1 Terra 26 Oct 2026
  • GPT-Live-1.1 15 Oct 2026
  • GPT-Live-1.1 Quip 15 Oct 2026
  • GPT-6.1 Sol 29 Sep 2026
  • GPT-6 Luna 22 Sep 2026
Models: Epoch AI, CC BY 4.0 licence.

2 · What it promised

Public commitments and signature status. Official lists have no dates: for names that appeared after our first reading of the list, the day we first saw them.

3 · What it wrote and changed

Under the Seoul commitments the companies promised to publish, by the Paris summit (10-11 February 2025), a safety framework on severe risks, with the thresholds beyond which they consider them intolerable.

safety framework published

First version
Dec 2023
Latest version
15 Apr 2025 · 2 versions found
Risk thresholds
the document contains risk thresholds This only says whether the document contains thresholds, not whether they are adequate.

Search by Claude of the company's websites on 27 Oct 2026, still to be checked again by a person.

Documents tracked over time

Versions of the text found in the copies of the Wayback Machine and Open Terms Archive: each point is a version that differs from the previous one.

Safety policy

Preparedness Framework (version 2) (opens in a new tab)

tracked since 15 Apr 20250 changes

Choose a point to read what changed.

Usage policy

Usage policies (opens in a new tab)

tracked since 11 Nov 20250 changes, plus 55 minor

Open Terms Archive combines the usage policies with some related pages (ChatGPT agent, sharing and publication).

Choose a point to read what changed.

Training data summary

EU AI Act: OpenAI Resources and Customer Guidance (opens in a new tab)

tracked since 13 Aug 20260 changes

OpenAI help page on the AI Act, linking the models' training data summaries.

Choose a point to read what changed.

Terms of service

Terms of Use (ChatGPT, Europe) (opens in a new tab)

tracked since 11 Nov 20250 changes

Open Terms Archive combines the European terms of use and the Service Terms.

Choose a point to read what changed.

Privacy policy

Privacy Policy (Europe) (opens in a new tab)

tracked since 11 Nov 20250 changes, plus 1 minor

Open Terms Archive combines the European privacy policy and the page on how data is used to improve the models.

Choose a point to read what changed.

Summaries by Claude, checked by a person; the text of the documents belongs to the company: read it through the links.

4 · What others say

Stanford Foundation Model Transparency Index

35 out of 100 (average of the 13 rated companies: 41) · Dec 2025 edition

Data: Stanford CRFM, CC BY 4.0 licence · data and method (opens in a new tab)

Ratings by others: see FLI AI Safety Index (Summer 2026) (opens in a new tab) · SaferAI, risk management (opens in a new tab). Link only: their scores cannot be republished without permission.

Each rating measures different things on different companies: they are not comparable with each other.

5 · What happened

Incidents in which the company is named as developer of the system (AI Incident Database and AIAAIC).

last 6 months
22
last 12 months
104
last 24 months
231

Severity, last 24 months: serious 42 · moderate 131 · minor 44 · not rated 14

Show 181 more

All incidents mentioning OpenAI, in Explore incidents →Where the harm happens, in Connections →

6 · What we cannot see

  • internal documents and unpublished safety evaluations;
  • versions of documents that no archive saved;
  • “no document found” is the result of a search, not proof that the document does not exist;
  • signatory lists often have no dates: the date is the day we first saw the name;
  • incidents the press does not report: the best-known companies have more recorded incidents because they are talked about more;
  • many incidents do not have a severity yet;
  • Chinese companies publish less in English and some of their commitments are read from third-party sources (AGORA).
Are you a company mentioned here?