Researchers propose 'Flourishing Metrics' to guide AGI development
New paper argues AI success should measure human well-being, not just performance.
Researchers Keyun Ruan, Jonathan D. Teubner, and John M. Bremen have published a paper proposing a paradigm shift in AI evaluation metrics. Titled 'Optimising for Flourishing: Flourishing Metrics and Return on Flourishing as Success Criteria for Artificial Intelligence and Post-AGI Economic Systems', the work introduces 'Flourishing Metrics'—an extensible framework that evaluates AI systems not just on performance but on their contribution to human flourishing across six dimensions: physical, emotional, financial, relational, spiritual, and planetary well-being.
The paper also introduces 'Return on Flourishing (RoF)', which extends traditional ROI calculations to measure how AI interventions contribute to flourishing relative to resource use and risks. The authors argue that current AI evaluation frameworks, focused on capability, safety, and financial return, are insufficient for assessing whether increasingly powerful systems truly improve human and planetary well-being. They propose RoF as a decision architecture to guide AI development, work redesign, institutional appraisal, and post-deployment monitoring, with safeguards to prevent unacceptable losses in any dimension or stakeholder group.
- Proposes 'Flourishing Metrics' as a 6-dimensional framework (physical, emotional, financial, relational, spiritual, planetary) for evaluating AI success beyond traditional metrics.
- Introduces 'Return on Flourishing (RoF)' to measure AI's contribution to human well-being relative to resource use and risks, extending traditional ROI calculations.
- Argues current AI evaluation frameworks are insufficient and calls for democratic specification, empirical calibration, and independent validation of these new metrics.
Why It Matters
Could redefine AI development priorities by centering human and planetary flourishing over pure performance metrics.