The Office of Science and Technology Policy said in a fact sheet that it had secured  hundreds of commitments with non-federal organizations to assist in areas of need within STEMM, such as improving representation in entertainment, ensuring inclusive workplaces, enabling related programs to be more accessible, and more.

OSTP’s announcement came during a White House summit on STEMM equity and excellence, expanding on the 2022 STEMM Opportunity Alliance (SOA) initiative to “lead and coordinate cross-sector action to help achieve greater equity” across science and technology-facing fields.  

The commitment to this effort is intended to “help drive progress” on STEMM Equity and Excellence 2050, a strategic plan released Wednesday by SOA that outlines a national strategy for constructing a diverse workforce with expanded opportunities.

“Knowing that those from underserved communities, individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, rural communities, women, people with disabilities and LGBTQI+ people have long faced barriers to equitable participation in STEMM, this administration has acted to foster a more just STEMM ecosystem,” Kei Koizumi, the principal deputy director for policy at OSTP, said during the event.

The office said in its press release that the SOA’s coalition represents over 200 organizations and “has powered additional commitments towards STEMM equity,” bringing a total of $2 billion to support these efforts. 

“The bold goal is to add 20 million new diverse STEMM professionals to the U.S. workforce across all jobs and sectors by 2050,” the strategic plan’s executive summary states. “This vision requires decades of concerted, coordinated action beginning now.”

OSTP touted non-federal partnerships that complement work done by federal entities, such as the Department of Energy’s first cohort for the agency’s Faculty-Applied Clean Energy Sciences program. That partnership, also announced Wednesday, will work to support the expansion of opportunities and diversification of the STEMM workforce. 

Participants in the DOE’s 10-week summer program were selected from minority-serving institutions that included tribal colleges and universities, historically Black colleges and universities, Asian-American and Native American Pacific Islander-serving institutions and others. 

Christy Jackiewicz, chief of the Minority Educational Institutions Division in DOE’s Office of Energy Justice and Equity, said in a statement that program leaders are “excited to partner with [the agency’s Office of Energy Justice and Equity] and [the National Renewable Energy Laboratory] to improve the future of STEM, not only through the faculty of minority-serving institutions but also through the students who will benefit from their knowledge and understanding, both in the classroom and as they enter the workforce of the future.”

The post OSTP unveils national STEMM strategy centered on improving workforce diversity and opportunities appeared first on FedScoop.

In a document posted for public inspection on the Federal Register Wednesday, the research, development and evaluation arm of the department said it’s seeking feedback to “inform a report that addresses the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the criminal justice system.” Those comments are due 30 days after the document is published.

That report is among the actions intended to strengthen AI and civil rights that President Joe Biden included in his October 2023 executive order on the technology. According to the order, its aim is to “promote the equitable treatment of individuals and adhere to the Federal Government’s fundamental obligation to ensure fair and impartial justice for all.”

Ultimately, the report is required to address the use of the technology throughout the criminal justice system — from sentencing and parole to policing surveillance and crime forecasting — as well as identify areas where AI could benefit law enforcement, outline recommended best practices, and make recommendations to the White House on additional actions. 

The DOJ must also work with the Homeland Security secretary and the director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy on that report, and it’s due 365 days after the order was issued.

The post DOJ seeks public input on AI use in criminal justice system appeared first on FedScoop.

The first PIF cohort of 21 fellows, introduced Monday, will work with “a broader technology focus” under their respective assignments at 14 agencies with “high-impact priorities.” Meanwhile the second group of fellows — to be announced this summer — will focus solely on artificial intelligence, according to the GSA, which houses the program under its Technology Transformation Services branch.

“More than ever, federal agencies are looking for top talent to help them improve the digital experience of their customers, better leverage data and enhance cybersecurity,” Robin Carnahan, GSA administrator, said in a release. “We’re excited to see how these innovators put their skills to work for the public good and collaborate alongside agency leaders to better deliver services for the American people in their moments of need.”

The agency shared in the release that the first cohort will be working “alongside partners to create innovative solutions that advance national priorities.” The AI-focused PIFs coming later in 2024 will aim to deliver on the AI executive order that President Joe Biden issued last year, which named the PIF program as one of the existing federal technology pipelines for recruiting AI talent into government. 

Previously, PIFs have worked on a variety of efforts, such as projects to improve data sharing throughout the Department of Veteran Affairs and ensure data-driven decision-making through modernization within the Department of Justice, among many others. The PIF program was launched in 2012 by the White House’s Office of Science and Technology Policy before it was transferred to GSA in 2013. During that time, the program has hosted more than 250 fellows who have worked at more than 50 agencies. Many of those fellows continue on in other innovative and often tech-focused roles within government.

So far, in light of the October AI executive order, the Biden administration has continued working towards recruiting and retaining an AI-talent workforce to keep up with the competition and challenges posed by the technology. 

Recently, the administration has established funds for the technology’s research and development talent recruitment alongside the other gaps for AI talent within the federal government.

The post GSA announces new Presidential Innovation Fellows focused broadly on tech, with a second AI cohort coming later in 2024 appeared first on FedScoop.

During a Wednesday event on U.S. investment in R&D, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, National Science Foundation and National Science Board discussed findings in The State of U.S. Science and Engineering 2024 report, including the fact that the U.S. spent $806 billion, or 3.5% of its gross domestic product, on R&D in 2021.  

While officials were eager to share R&D successes from the federal government, they also looked to the report to shed light on workforce development needs for STEM-related fields, as well as the need to enhance educational opportunities for domestic students. 

“R&D is how we open the doors so that the future can be better than the past; it’s how we overcome the limitations of today and step into a better tomorrow,” OSTP Director Arati Prabhakar said during the event. “This report and the president’s budget both remind us of the tremendous strengths that we have here in America with our R&D capabilities, and they also start us on this important path to the work ahead.”

President Joe Biden’s fiscal year 2025 budget leans into innovation through R&D efforts: A fact sheet OSTP shared with FedScoop highlights a request for a 36% funding increase (to a reported $900 million) for NSF’s Directorate for Technology Innovation and Partnerships, along with $606 million for the Department of Energy’s Office of Science to “integrate supercomputing, AI and quantum-based technology for developing the next-generation high-performance computing systems.”

“Most of these innovation-intensive industries, of course, grew out of prior federal R&D investments,” Prabhakar said. “If you think about that, that is true in fields that are diverse as artificial intelligence and new medicines and clean energy, so I think it’s a very consistent theme.”

Additionally, OSTP shared in the release that artificial intelligence R&D funds will be spread across federal agencies to further the development of responsible AI, citing a budget request of $729 million for NSF, a 10% increase, including $30 million for a second year of the National AI Research Resource pilot. 

An OSTP spokesperson shared in an email that the FY 2025 budget also includes a reported $32 million request to support the AI talent surge, and pointed to upcoming Office of Management and Budget issuance of AI guidelines for government to both address risks and encourage innovation. 

OMB “will soon issue the first governmentwide policy to mitigate the risks and harness the benefits in the federal government’s own use of AI,” the spokesperson said. “To fully deliver on this mission, we need the right people. President Biden launched an AI talent surge to bring more AI professionals into the Federal government to help us achieve our ambitious AI agenda. … We’re very excited about the talent we’ve brought on to date, and the talent we will bring on to work on high-priority AI projects.”

The spokesperson noted the Presidential Innovation Fellows, the U.S. Digital Corps and the U.S. Digital Service as some of the tech talent programs that have been advancing the goals of the administration where the AI talent search is concerned. 

Still, the country can’t rely solely on those programs, given the fact that occupations requiring STEM knowledge account for 24% of the U.S. workforce, and 19% of all STEM workers were born abroad, per the report. NSB Chair Dan Reed said the flow of domestic talent into the STEM workforce has to increase. The total STEM workforce is around 37 million individuals, a mix of those with at least a bachelor’s and those with technical skills who do not have at least an undergraduate degree. 

Reed acknowledged the value of attracting foreign workers, calling the country “a global magnet for talent. That’s been one of our superpowers, that the best and the brightest on the planet want to study and work here. We have to preserve that, but it’s not a given. They come because they see opportunities; we have to continue to create those opportunities.”

For the domestic workforce, Reed said there is cause for concern, and it starts with education.

The NSB chair referenced the report’s findings of a “sharp decline” in elementary and secondary education mathematics performance, and the fact that women and minorities are underrepresented when it comes to bachelor’s and graduate degrees in science and engineering.

“We have to improve access to higher education as students are to pursue advanced STEM degrees,” Reed said. At the same time, the country “must continue to welcome international students from around the globe and to implement policies that entice [and] enable them to stay and work here after they receive their degrees.”

The post U.S. is leading the way in R&D, but tech workforce development is still a concern for federal officials appeared first on FedScoop.

The long-awaited order arrived with a laundry list of requirements for agencies, which are now tasked with growing the federal talent pool with workers who have experience in AI research, development, procurement and deployment. 

To fill that pool, the Biden administration is “putting a lot of emphasis on bringing in talent from everywhere,” White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director Arati Prabhakar said in an interview with FedScoop, underlining the importance foreign nationals will play in getting the federal government up to speed on AI.

The executive order’s callouts to boost the AI workforce within federal agencies “is just the next chapter of a long American story of people, American kids going into science and technology and making huge contributions,” Prabhakar said. “Also coupled with being able to attract some amazing talent from around the world and who come here for these tremendous opportunities in our country. [White House officials] very much want to make sure both of those continue to happen.”

At AI.gov, the Biden administration has highlighted both immigrant and nonimmigrant pathways for foreign nationals to bring their knowledge of AI to the federal government. 

And in cases where agencies face challenges in the form of lengthy hiring processes or other roadblocks for meeting workforce requirements laid out in the order, OSTP is providing “levers” to help, Prabhakar said. That includes AI-specific cohorts, created by the Presidential Innovation Fellows and the U.S. Digital Corps, bringing talent from the private sector to the public sector.

Lynne Parker, a former deputy U.S. chief technology officer who assisted with the Trump White House’s 2020 executive order that called on agencies to annually create AI use case inventories, said in an interview with FedScoop that there is a “shortage” of AI talent. There’s also the challenge, Parker added, of the government competing for AI talent with industry,  where individuals are able to solve “interesting problems” for higher pay. 

“If you’re going to be training the talent in our universities here, then obviously it makes a lot of sense for us to try to recruit them to stay here to benefit the United States,” Parker said. “Since there’s such a huge shortfall of talent, I think there’s that emphasis on immigration, [which] is a recognition of the fact that … a high percentage of people who are getting that expert-level training [in AI] are coming from overseas. That’s where I think the most immediate pipeline of available talent is.”

Parker said it’s possible that “many Ph.D. graduates would like to go into academia, but they may feel like it’s too difficult to get the research funding that they need in order to be successful.” But if funding were available to train more students, and funding was easier to attain, then individuals may be more inclined to go into academia to train the next generation, she said.

Prabhakar, meanwhile, noted the various open roles for AI across the government makes clear the “need to learn how to use this powerful technology in really creative ways that are deeply responsible as a great way for government to lead by example in the use of AI.” 

“We were thrilled with the response to the AI talent surge when the executive order came out,” she added. “Just an enormous volume of wonderful resumes that came in —  people who have built all the data systems and the computational capacity that you have to have [in order] to use AI intelligently.”

OSTP is trying to leverage effective tech talent programs deployed over the past decade to bring more tech-centric skills into government, Prabhakar said, with the aim of providing those interested in working on AI with more opportunities in federal agencies. 

The feedback from agencies on the EO’s actions, including workforce requirements, has so far been positive, according to Olivia Zhu, a senior policy adviser with OSTP. In an interview with FedScoop, Zhu said the White House is “super optimistic that we’ve gotten a really large influx of interest from the public.”

“When we were creating this executive order, the president directed the team to pull every lever,” Zhu said. “The feedback is reflecting our intentions of understanding that AI has such broad applications in various areas, right from the workforce to the use in government, to ensuring that we have safety standards.”

This article was updated Dec. 22, 2023, with quotes from OSTP’s Olivia Zhu.

The post AI talent wanted: The federal government is searching far and wide to fill new cutting-edge positions appeared first on FedScoop.

The introduction of the bill by Science Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., and ranking member Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., comes after the 2018 law expired Sept. 30 and, according to a release from the bill sponsors, builds off those accomplishments in an effort to ensure U.S. competitiveness against China and Russia. 

“There’s no time to lose momentum, and I’m confident this bill will empower the government, private sector, and academia to keep working together to advance leading-edge quantum systems,” Lucas said in the release.

The National Quantum Initiative Reauthorization Act, among other things, includes provisions requiring the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to develop a quantum research strategy with allies to compete with China and Russia, authorizing the National Institute of Standards and Technology to establish three centers for quantum research, and authorizing the creation of a National Science Foundation hub to coordinate workforce pipelines.

It would also authorize the Department of Energy to support quantum foundry development in an effort to meet supply chain needs, and formally authorizes NASA’s quantum research and the creation of its own quantum institute.

Despite the National Quantum Initiative being set up as a 10-year effort, the 2018 bill authorized the centers for only five years, according to a June report from the National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee. That panel recommended support beyond the original sunset in 2028 and an expansion of the program, such as authorization of additional quantum-focused research centers.

“The 2018 National Quantum Initiative Act enabled the U.S. science and technology enterprise to progress tremendously in this critical technology,” Lofgren said in the release. “We must now build upon these original investments to ensure the United States can remain the world leader in quantum — this bill will do that and more.”

The post Lawmakers introduce bipartisan bill to reauthorize National Quantum Initiative Act appeared first on FedScoop.

“In parallel with [the AI executive order], we also have announced previously that the Office of Management and Budget is putting out guidance for how the government uses AI,” Arati Prabhakar, director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy and Biden’s top technology adviser, said during a Washington Post event. “And that is a very big deal because getting that right is a tremendous opportunity for leadership.”

“Staff has been working [on the OMB guidance] in parallel with the EO and I expect that to be released soon,” Prabhakar added.

There have been multiple reports this week stating that the White House had sent out invitations for a “Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence” event on Oct. 30. The AI executive order is expected to be announced during the Biden-hosted event. 

Prabhakar in September teased the upcoming AI executive order, saying that it will determine how the executive branch uses AI to mitigate risks while also “seizing the huge opportunities.” The EO will “be broad,” she added.

The OMB guidance on AI is expected to be far more detailed about how specifically federal agencies and officials should implement AI technology and policies within their organizations. 

The post OSTP’s Arati Prabhakar says OMB guidance on AI to be released ‘soon’ after AI executive order appeared first on FedScoop.

Speaking with FedScoop, five AI policy experts said adhering to both the White House’s Blueprint for an AI ‘Bill of Rights’ and the AI Risk Management Framework (RMF), published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, presents an obstacle for companies working to develop responsible AI products.

However, the White House and civil rights groups have pushed back on claims that the two voluntary AI safety frameworks send conflicting messages and have highlighted that they are a productive “starting point” in the absence of congressional action on AI. 

The two policy documents form the foundation of the Biden administration’s approach to regulating artificial intelligence. But for many months, there has been an active debate among AI experts regarding how helpful — or in some cases hindering — the Biden administration’s dual approach to AI policymaking has been.

The White House’s Blueprint for an AI ‘Bill of Rights’ was published last October. It takes a rights-based approach to AI, focusing on broad fundamental human rights as a starting point for the regulation of the technology. That was followed by the risk-based AI RMF in January, which set out to determine the scale and scope of risks related to concrete use cases and recognized threats to instill trustworthiness into the technology.

Speaking with FedScoop, Daniel Castro, a technology policy scholar and vice president at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF), noted that there are “big, major philosophical differences in the approach taken by the two Biden AI policy documents,” which are creating “different [and] at times adverse” outcomes for the industry.

“A lot of companies that want to move forward with AI guidelines and frameworks want to be doing the right thing but they really need more clarity. They will not invest in AI safety if it’s confusing or going to be a wasted effort or if instead of the NIST AI framework they’re pushed towards the AI blueprint,” Castro said.

Castro’s thoughts were echoed by Adam Thierer of the libertarian nonprofit R Street Institute who said that despite a sincere attempt to emphasize democratic values within AI tools, there are “serious issues” with the Biden administration’s handling of AI policy driven by tensions between the two key AI frameworks.

“The Biden administration is trying to see how far it can get away with using their bully pulpit and jawboning tactics to get companies and agencies to follow their AI policies, particularly with the blueprint,” Thierer, senior fellow on the Technology and Innovation team at R Street, told FedScoop.

Two industry sources who spoke with FedScoop but wished to remain anonymous said they felt pushed toward the White House’s AI blueprint over the NIST AI framework in certain instances during meetings regarding AI policymaking with the White House’s Office of Science and Technology (OSTP).

Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Okla., chair of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, and House Oversight Chairman Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., have been highly critical of the White House blueprint as it compares to the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, expressing concern earlier this year that the blueprint sends “conflicting messages about U.S. federal AI policy.”

In a letter obtained exclusively by FedScoop, Arati Prabhakar responded to those concerns, arguing that “these documents are not contradictory” and highlighting how closely the White House and NIST are working together on future regulation of the technology.

At the same time, some industry AI experts say the way in which the two documents define AI clash with one another.

Nicole Foster, who leads global AI and machine learning policy at Amazon Web Services, said chief among the concerns with the documents are diverging definitions of the technology itself. She told FedScoop earlier this year that “there are some inconsistencies between the two documents for sure. I think just at a basic level they don’t even define things like AI in the same way.”

Foster’s thoughts were echoed by Raj Iyer, global head of public sector at cloud software provider ServiceNow and former CIO of the U.S. Army, who believes the two frameworks are a good starting point to get industry engaged in AI policymaking but that they lack clarity.

“I feel like the two frameworks are complementary. But there’s clearly some ambiguity and vagueness in terms of definition,” said Iyer.

“So what does the White House mean by automated systems? Is it autonomous systems? Is it automated decision-making? What is it? I think it’s very clear that they did that to kind of steer away from wanting to have a direct conversation on AI,” Iyer added.

Hodan Omaar, an AI and quantum research scholar working with Castro at ITIF, said the two documents appear to members of the tech industry as if they are on different tracks. According to Omaar, the divergence creates a risk that organizations will simply defer to either the “Bill of Rights” or the NIST RMF and ignore the other.

“There are two things the White House should be doing. First, it should better elucidate the ways the Blueprint should be used in conjunction with the RMF. And second, it should better engage with stakeholders to gather input on how the Blueprint can be improved and better implemented by organizations,” Omaar told FedScoop.

In addition to compatibility concerns about the two documents, experts have also raised concerns about the process followed by the White House to take industry feedback in creating the documents.

Speaking with FedScoop anonymously in order to speak freely, one industry association AI official said that listening sessions held by the Office of Science and Technology Policy were not productive.

“The Bill of Rights and the development of that, we have quite a bit of concern because businesses were not properly consulted throughout that process,” the association official said. 

The official added: “OSTP’s listening sessions were just not productive or helpful. We tried to actually provide input in ways in which businesses could help them through this process. Sadly, that’s just not what they wanted.”

The AI experts’ comments come as the Biden administration works to establish a regulatory framework that mitigates potential threats posed by the technology while supporting American AI innovation. Last month, the White House secured voluntary commitments from seven leading AI companies about how AI is used, and it is expected to issue a new executive order on AI safety in the coming weeks.

One of the contributors to the White House’s AI Blueprint sympathizes with concerns from industry leaders and AI experts regarding the confusion and complexity of the administration’s approach to AI policymaking. But it’s also an opportunity for companies seeking voluntary AI policymaking guidance to put more effort into asking themselves hard questions, he said.

“So I understand the concerns very much. And I feel the frustration. And I understand people just want clarity. But clarity will only come once you understand the implications, the broader values, discussion and the issues in the context of your own AI creations,” said Suresh Venkatasubramanian, a Brown University professor and former top official within the White House’s OSTP, where he helped co-author its Blueprint for an ‘AI Bill of Rights.’ 

“The goal is not to say: Do every single thing in these frameworks. It’s like, understand the issues, understand the values at play here. Understand the questions you need to be asking from the RMF and the Blueprint, and then make your own decisions,” said Venkatasubramanian.

On top of that, the White House Blueprint co-author wants those who criticize the documents’ perceived contradictions to be more specific in their complaints.

“Tell me a question in the NIST RMF that contradicts a broader goal in the White House blueprint — find one for me, or two or three. I’m not saying this because I think they don’t exist. I’m saying this because if you could come up with these examples, then we could think through what can we do about it?” he said.

Venkatasubramanian added that he feels the White House AI blueprint in particular has faced resistance from industry because “for the first time someone in a position of power came out and said: What about the people?” when it comes to tech innovation and regulations. 

Civil rights groups like the Electronic Privacy Information Center have also joined the greater discussion about AI regulations, pushing back on the notion that industry groups should play any significant role in the policymaking of a rights-based document created by the White House.

“I’m sorry that industry is upset that a policy document is not reflective of their incentives, which is just to make money and take people’s data and make whatever decisions they want to make more contracts. It’s a policy document, they don’t get to write it,” said Ben Winters, the senior counsel at EPIC, where he leads their work on AI and human rights.

Groups like EPIC and a number of others have called upon the Biden administration to take more aggressive steps to protect the public from the potential harms of AI.

“I actually don’t think that the Biden administration has taken a super aggressive role when trying to implement these two frameworks and policies that the administration has set forth. When it comes to using the frameworks for any use of AI within the government or federal contractors or recipients of federal funds, they’re not doing enough in terms of using their bully pulpit and applying pressure. I really don’t think they’re doing too much yet,” said Winters.

Meanwhile, the White House has maintained that the two AI documents were created for different purposes but designed to be used side-by-side as initial voluntary guidance, noting that both OSTP and NIST were involved in the creation of both frameworks.

OSTP spokesperson Subhan Cheema said: “President Biden has been clear that companies have a fundamental responsibility to ensure their products are safe before they are released to the public, and that innovation must not come at the expense of people’s rights and safety. That’s why the administration has moved with urgency to advance responsible innovation that manage the risks posed by AI and seize its promise — including by securing voluntary commitments from seven leading AI companies that will help move us toward AI development that is more safe, secure, and trustworthy.”

“These commitments are a critical step forward and build on the administration’s Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights and AI Risk Management Framework. The administration is also currently developing an executive order that will ensure the federal government is doing everything in its power to support responsible innovation and protect people’s rights and safety, and will also pursue bipartisan legislation to help America lead the way in responsible innovation,” Cheema added.

NIST did not respond to requests for comment.

The post Experts warn of ‘contradictions’ in Biden administration’s top AI policy documents appeared first on FedScoop.

Matheny officially was given three titles: deputy assistant to the president for technology and national security, deputy director for national security in the Office of Science and Technology Policy and coordinator for technology and national security at the National Security Council. 

In addition to his time as the leader of IARPA, Matheny recently founded and led Georgetown’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET). He also served as a commissioner on the Pentagon-housed National Security Commissions on Artificial Intelligence, which recommended in early March several changes to national AI policy he will now help oversee at the White House.

“In just a few short years, Jason has built CSET into a major player in the field of emerging technology and national security policy, recruiting an incredible roster of researchers and fellows and producing influential papers that are shaping the policy dialogue,” Joel Hellman, dean of Georgetown’s Walsh School of Foreign Service, said in a note to staff about Matheny’s departure. Dewey Murdick, the current director of data science at CSET, has taken over for Matheny as interim director.

Matheny appears well-liked and respected by his colleagues, both for his intellect and kindness, with many taking to Twitter to congratulate him:

Matheny’s new job comes at a critical time for technology and national security. The so-called race for AI is increasing in speed and importance with leaders expressing strong desires to adopt AI in critical defense systems. During Matheny’s time at the helm of CSET, much of the think tank’s research focused on the impacts of AI and similar emerging technologies and their national security implications.

“We are excited to have his expertise as President Biden and the NSC elevate US investment in technology and innovation and work with our allies and partners to ensure emerging technologies are safe, secure, and beneficial to free societies,” an administration official told FedScoop about Matheny’s appointment.

The NSCAI report Matheny helped author is already getting traction one of his new bosses, national security advisor Jake Sullivan. “The U.S. and its allies must continue to lead in AI, microelectronics, biotech, and other emerging tech to ensure that these technologies are safe, secure, and beneficial to free societies,” Sullivan Tweeted after saying he received a briefing by the commission

The post Jason Matheny to serve Biden White House in national security and tech roles appeared first on FedScoop.

“While it is becoming well recognized that cloud computing can advance AI R&D, several technical and administrative challenges are currently limiting cloud adoption, ” the report from the Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence says.

For example, inconsistencies in the methods of accessing and using cloud computing create barriers to using the technology for AI research, the report says. It also cites limited access to education and training opportunities for cloud use.

The committee, part of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) at the Office of Science and Technology Policy, made four key recommendations to overcome these challenges. They revolve around pilot projects, education, identity management and interoperability among different cloud platforms.

The panel also suggested that pilot projects can help explore the challenges and advantages of using cloud computing in federally funded AI research, something that agencies like the Department of Defense’s Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Veterans Affairs have already launched.

Agencies should then couple these projects with education and training opportunities for researchers to help “realize [cloud-based platforms’] full benefits for advancing AI frontiers,” the panel said.

Also in that timeline, the committee suggested that the NSTC’s Subcommittee on Machine Learning & Artificial Intelligence establish a task force to find best practices in identity management, such as token-based access, and single-sign-on strategies. The goal would be to respect data contributors while also allowing for discovery and research within relevant datasets.

“It is time to move beyond role-based access to data to new strategies that promote investigator access to data in a manner that provides fine-grained access control,” the report reads.

The select committee was formed in May 2018 with the mission to ensure U.S. leadership in artificial intelligence.

The post Better use of cloud can improve outlook for agencies’ AI development, White House report says appeared first on FedScoop.