Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Why and How Governments Should Monitor AI Development

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2108.12427 v2 pith:OMZGLWLJ submitted 2021-08-28 cs.CY cs.AI

classification cs.CYcs.AI
keywords governmentsproposalcapabilitiesdeploymentdevelopmentecosystemgovernanceinfrastructure
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

In this paper we outline a proposal for improving the governance of artificial intelligence (AI) by investing in government capacity to systematically measure and monitor the capabilities and impacts of AI systems. If adopted, this would give governments greater information about the AI ecosystem, equipping them to more effectively direct AI development and deployment in the most societally and economically beneficial directions. It would also create infrastructure that could rapidly identify potential threats or harms that could occur as a consequence of changes in the AI ecosystem, such as the emergence of strategically transformative capabilities, or the deployment of harmful systems. We begin by outlining the problem which motivates this proposal: in brief, traditional governance approaches struggle to keep pace with the speed of progress in AI. We then present our proposal for addressing this problem: governments must invest in measurement and monitoring infrastructure. We discuss this proposal in detail, outlining what specific things governments could focus on measuring and monitoring, and the kinds of benefits this would generate for policymaking. Finally, we outline some potential pilot projects and some considerations for implementing this in practice.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Risks of AI-driven product development and strategies for their mitigation

    cs.CY 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    AI-driven product development will bring technical and societal risks; the paper proposes eight mitigation principles: human control, accountability, explainable and tested design, constrained and sandboxed systems, a...

Pith tools