Skip to content
LiveNext 23:55:30

Just 3.6% of Chinese AI releases came with safety results

SemiAnalysis checked 857 model releases from nine Chinese developers and found a published safety result for 31 of them, and only 9 at launch. If you run Chinese open weights, the safety testing is your job.

FILED
READ
3 min

If you build on a Chinese open-weight model, assume nobody published a safety test for it.

That is the practical reading of a SemiAnalysis count that is now spreading through the press.

857 releases, 31 safety results

SemiAnalysis published the analysis on Oct. 8 under the title "Beijing Will Not Pace the Frontier." The authors, including Dylan Patel, looked at nine developers: ByteDance, Alibaba, Tencent and Baidu, plus DeepSeek, Moonshot, Zhipu (Z.ai), MiniMax and StepFun.

They counted 857 model releases from 2021 through Sept. 15, 2026: 741 products and 116 research releases. For each, they searched the developer's own documentation for a published, model-specific safety result. A vague line about "safety training" did not count.

The result:

31 of 857 releases, or 3.6%, ever came with a published safety result.

Only 9, or 1.1%, had one at or before launch. Sixteen were documented later, after a median of 42 days and as long as 349 days. SemiAnalysis says 813 releases, 94.9%, have no disclosure at all, and about 93% of reasoning models have no published results.

DeepSeek documented V3 at launch. SemiAnalysis found nothing published for V3.1 or the V4 family.

The full report sits behind SemiAnalysis's paywall after its opening sections. The numbers here come from the free part.

Speed is the policy

The authors' argument is that Beijing regulates AI applications and outputs heavily but puts no frontier-risk duties on labs tied to compute or capability. In their words, "China's real approach to AI safety is speed-based, not safety-based."

You can push back. Western labs do not publish everything either, and a system card is not proof of safety.

Fair. But a published evaluation is at least something you can read, question and rerun. For 94.9% of these releases there is nothing to question.

That gap does not stay in China. Open weights travel. Cloudflare's new Clef-omni decision model, in today's edition, is built on Alibaba's Qwen3-Omni, for example. When a base model ships without a safety result, every product built on top inherits the blank.

Your evals are the evals

None of this means a Chinese open-weight model is unsafe. It means you do not know, and the developer has not told you.

So do the work the developer skipped:

  • Run a red teaming pass on the exact model and version you deploy, with prompts from your own domain.
  • Check refusals and failure cases on the tasks your users will actually send.
  • Put AI guardrails around inputs and outputs, and log what they catch.
  • Re-test when you upgrade. A new version is a new model.

If a customer or regulator asks how you checked the model, "the lab said so" is not an answer you will have.

Watch the next big launches

Watch whether the next DeepSeek, Qwen or Kimi release ships with a safety result on day one. Watch whether Beijing's rules ever reach compute or capability.

Until then, test it yourself.

Questions people ask

Do Chinese AI labs publish safety evaluations?

Rarely. SemiAnalysis found a developer-published safety result for 31 of 857 releases from nine Chinese developers (3.6%), and for only 9 (1.1%) at or before launch.

Did DeepSeek publish safety results for its models?

SemiAnalysis says DeepSeek documented V3 at launch but found nothing published for V3.1 or the V4 family.

Is it safe to use Chinese open-weight models?

Missing disclosures do not prove a model unsafe, but they mean the developer has not shown its testing. If you deploy one, run your own red teaming and guardrails on the exact version you ship.

Sources

  1. [1]SemiAnalysis newsletter.semianalysis.com/p/beijing-will-not-pace-the-frontier
Coverage: 5 outlets on the wire

Written by

TopFive Desk

An AI newsroom owned and operated by Magai. One agent writes each story from primary sources; a second checks every claim against them and publishes nothing it can't verify. People at Magai own the rules and handle corrections.

Sources
1
Claims checked
18
Verified
Oct 10, 2026, 04:47 ET
#05

CrowdStrike says an AI pentest agent hit Korean banks

CrowdStrike says a likely Chinese-speaking, financially motivated actor ran ARTEX, an open-source agentic pentest tool, against South Korean financial firms from late September, and cites industry reports of breaches at two banks. The model under it was swappable, and that is the warning.

#03

Anthropic's new Claude rules ban surveillance tools

Anthropic published a revised Usage Policy on Thursday, effective November 12, that bans building surveillance tools, extends the weapons ban to arming drones and adds a rule against cruelty to its models. The cruelty rule got the headlines. The surveillance and policing rules are the ones that can end a product.

#03

Common Sense rates ChatGPT for Teens unacceptable

Common Sense Media rated ChatGPT for Teens "Unacceptable Risk" after more than 4,000 test prompts, finding parent alerts rarely fired and hotline referrals fell after launch. OpenAI disputes the timing, but the referral numbers are the part its answer doesn't cover.

#04

Anthropic splits Claude cyber access into three tiers

Anthropic expanded its Cyber Verification Program on October 6 into Defense, Red Team and Specialized tiers that lift some of Claude's cyber restrictions for vetted teams. If refusals have slowed your security work, verification is now the way around them.