The order establishes stringent standards for AI safety and security, safeguards Americans’ privacy, promotes equity and civil rights, protects consumers and workers, fosters innovation and competition, and enhances American leadership on the global stage.

Key actions outlined in the order:

1. New standards for AI safety and security: The order mandates that developers of powerful AI systems share safety test results and critical information with the U.S. government. Rigorous standards, tools, and tests will be developed to ensure AI systems are safe, secure, and trustworthy before public release. Additionally, measures will be taken to protect against the risks of using AI to engineer dangerous biological materials and combat AI-enabled fraud and deception.
2. Protecting citizens’ privacy: The President calls on Congress to pass bipartisan data privacy legislation, prioritizing federal support for privacy-preserving techniques, especially those using AI. Guidelines will be developed for federal agencies to evaluate the effectiveness of privacy-preserving techniques, including those used in AI systems.
3. Advancing equity and civil rights: Clear guidance will be provided to prevent AI algorithms from exacerbating discrimination, especially in areas like housing and federal benefit programs. Best practices will be established for the use of AI in the criminal justice system to ensure fairness.
4. Standing up for consumers, patients, and students: Responsible use of AI in healthcare and education will be promoted, ensuring that consumers are protected from harmful AI applications while benefiting from its advancements in these sectors.
5. Supporting workers: Principles and best practices will be developed to mitigate the harms and maximise the benefits of AI for workers, addressing issues such as job displacement, workplace equity, and health and safety. A report on AI’s potential labour-market impacts will be produced, identifying options for strengthening federal support for workers facing labour disruptions due to AI.
6. Promoting innovation and competition: The order aims to catalyse AI research across the US, promote a fair and competitive AI ecosystem, and expand the ability of highly skilled immigrants and non-immigrants to study, stay, and work in the US to foster innovation in the field.
7. Advancing leadership abroad: The US will collaborate with other nations to establish international frameworks for safe and trustworthy AI deployment. Efforts will be made to accelerate the development and implementation of vital AI standards with international partners and promote the responsible development and deployment of AI abroad to address global challenges.
8. Ensuring responsible and effective government adoption: Clear standards and guidelines will be issued for government agencies’ use of AI to protect rights and safety. Efforts will be made to help agencies acquire AI products and services more rapidly and efficiently, and an AI talent surge will be initiated to enhance government capacity in AI-related fields.

The executive order signifies a major step forward in the US towards harnessing the potential of AI while safeguarding individuals’ rights and security.

“As we advance this agenda at home, the Administration will work with allies and partners abroad on a strong international framework to govern the development and use of AI,” wrote the White House in a statement.

“The actions that President Biden directed today are vital steps forward in the US’ approach on safe, secure, and trustworthy AI. More action will be required, and the Administration will continue to work with Congress to pursue bipartisan legislation to help America lead the way in responsible innovation.”

The administration’s commitment to responsible innovation is paramount and sets the stage for continued collaboration with international partners to shape the future of AI globally.

(Photo by David Everett Strickler on Unsplash)

See also: UK paper highlights AI risks ahead of global Safety Summit

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is co-located with Cyber Security & Cloud Expo and Digital Transformation Week.

Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.

The post Biden issues executive order to ensure responsible AI development appeared first on AI News.

This landmark case represents the first major legal battle where the music industry confronts an AI developer head-on. UMG – along with several other key industry players including Concord Music Group, ABKCO, Worship Together Music, and Plaintiff Capital CMG – is seeking $75 million in damages.

The lawsuit centres around the alleged unauthorised use of copyrighted music by Anthropic to train its AI models. The publishers claim that Anthropic illicitly incorporated songs from artists they represent into its AI dataset without obtaining the necessary permissions.

Legal representatives for the publishers have asserted that the action was taken to address the “systematic and widespread infringement” of copyrighted song lyrics by Anthropic.

The lawsuit, spanning 60 pages and posted online by The Hollywood Reporter, emphasises the publishers’ support for innovation and ethical AI use. However, they contend that Anthropic has violated these principles and must be held accountable under established copyright laws.

Anthropic, despite positioning itself as an AI ‘safety and research’ company, stands accused of copyright infringement without regard for the law or the creative community whose works underpin its services, according to the lawsuit.

In addition to the significant monetary damages, the publishers have demanded a jury trial. They also seek reimbursement for legal fees, the destruction of all infringing material, public disclosure of how Anthropic’s AI model was trained, and financial penalties of up to $150,000 per infringed work.

This latest lawsuit follows a string of legal battles between AI developers and creators. Each new case is worth observing to see the precedent that is set for future battles.

(Photo by Jason Rosewell on Unsplash)

See also: BSI: Closing ‘AI confidence gap’ key to unlocking benefits

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is co-located with Digital Transformation Week.

Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.

The post UMG files landmark lawsuit against AI developer Anthropic appeared first on AI News.

This hurried effort comes in anticipation of the UK’s AI Safety Summit scheduled next month at the historic Bletchley Park.

The summit, designed to provide an update on White House-brokered safety guidelines – as well as facilitate a debate on how national security agencies can scrutinise the most dangerous versions of this technology – faces a potential hurdle. It’s unlikely to generate an agreement on establishing a new international organisation to scrutinise cutting-edge AI, apart from its proposed communique.

The proposed AI Safety Institute, a brainchild of the UK government, aims to enable national security-related scrutiny of frontier AI models. However, this ambition might face disappointment if an international consensus is not reached.

Claire Trachet, tech industry expert and CEO of business advisory Trachet, said:

“I think that this marks a very important moment for the UK, especially in terms of recognising that there are other players across Europe also hoping to catch up with the US in the AI space. It’s therefore essential that the UK continues to balance its drive for innovation with creating effective regulation that will not stifle the country’s growth prospects.

While the UK possesses the potential to be a frontrunner in the global tech race, concerted efforts are needed to strengthen the country’s position. By investing in research, securing supply chains, promoting collaboration, and nurturing local talent, the UK can position itself as a prominent player in shaping the future of AI-driven technologies.”

Currently, the UK stands as a key player in the global tech arena, with its AI market valued at over £16.9 billion and expected to soar to £803.7 billion by 2035, according to the US International Trade.

The British government’s commitment is evident through its £1 billion investment in supercomputing and AI research. Moreover, the introduction of seven new AI principles for regulation – focusing on accountability, access, diversity, choice, flexibility, fair dealing, and transparency – showcases the government’s dedication to fostering a robust AI ecosystem.

Despite these efforts, challenges loom as France emerges as a formidable competitor within Europe.

French billionaire Xavier Niel recently announced a €200 million investment in artificial intelligence, including a research lab and supercomputer, aimed at bolstering Europe’s competitiveness in the global AI race.

Niel’s initiative aligns with President Macron’s commitment, who announced €500 million in new funding at VivaTech to create new AI champions. Furthermore, France plans to attract companies through its own AI summit.

Claire Trachet acknowledges the intensifying competition between the UK and France, stating that while the rivalry adds complexity to the UK’s goals, it can also spur innovation within the industry. However, Trachet emphasises the importance of the UK striking a balance between innovation and effective regulation to sustain its growth prospects.

“In my view, if Europe wants to truly make a meaningful impact, they must leverage their collective resources, foster collaboration, and invest in nurturing a robust ecosystem,” adds Trachet.

“This means combining the strengths of the UK, France and Germany, to possibly create a compelling alternative in the next 10-15 years that disrupts the AI landscape, but again, this would require a heavily strategic vision and collaborative approach.”

(Photo by Nick Kane on Unsplash)

See also: Cyber Security & Cloud Expo: The alarming potential of AI-powered cybercrime

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is co-located with Digital Transformation Week.

Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.

The post UK races to agree statement on AI risks with global leaders appeared first on AI News.

Dowden has urged governments to take immediate action to regulate AI development, warning that the rapid pace of advancement in AI technology could outstrip their ability to ensure its safe and responsible use.

Speaking at the UN General Assembly in New York, Dowden highlighted that the UK will host a global summit in November to discuss the regulation of AI. The summit aims to bring together international leaders, experts, and industry representatives to address the pressing concerns surrounding AI.

One of the primary fears surrounding unchecked AI development is the potential for widespread job displacement, the proliferation of misinformation, and the deepening of societal discrimination. Without adequate regulations in place, AI technologies could be harnessed to magnify these negative effects.

“The starting gun has been fired on a globally competitive race in which individual companies as well as countries will strive to push the boundaries as far and fast as possible,” Dowden cautioned during his address.

Dowden went on to note that the current state of global regulation lags behind the rapid advances in AI technology. Unlike the past, where regulations followed technological developments, Dowden stressed that rules must now be established in tandem with AI’s evolution.

Oseloka Obiora, CTO at RiverSafe, said: “Business leaders are jumping into bed with the latest AI trends at an alarming rate, with little or no concern for the consequences.

“With global regulatory standards falling way behind and the most basic cyber security checks being neglected, it is right for the government to call for new global standards to prevent the AI ticking timebomb from exploding.”

Dowden underscored the importance of ensuring that AI companies do not have undue influence over the regulatory process. He emphasised the need for transparency and oversight, stating that AI companies should not “mark their own homework.” Instead, governments and citizens should have confidence that risks associated with AI are being properly mitigated.

Moreover, Dowden highlighted that only coordinated action by nation-states could provide the necessary assurance to the public that significant national security concerns stemming from AI have been adequately addressed.

He also cautioned against oversimplifying the role of AI—noting that it can be both a tool for good and a tool for ill, depending on its application. During the UN General Assembly, the UK also pitched AI’s potential to accelerate development in the world’s most impoverished nations.

The UK’s initiative to host a global AI regulation summit signals a growing recognition among world leaders of the urgent need to establish a robust framework for AI governance. As AI technology continues to advance, governments are under increasing pressure to strike the right balance between innovation and safeguarding against potential risks.

Jake Moore, Global Cybersecurity Expert at ESET, comments: “The fear that AI could shape our lives in a completely new direction is not without substance, as the power behind the technology churning this wheel is potentially destructive. Not only could AI change jobs, it also has the ability to change what we know to be true and impact what we believe.   

“Regulating it would mean potentially stifling innovation. But even attempting to regulate such a powerful beast would be like trying to regulate the dark web, something that is virtually impossible. Large datasets and algorithms can be designed to do almost anything, so we need to start looking at how we can improve educating people, especially young people in schools, into understanding this new wave of risk.”

Dowden’s warning to the United Nations serves as a clarion call for nations to come together and address the challenges posed by AI head-on. The global summit in November will be a critical step in shaping the future of AI governance and ensuring that the world order remains stable in the face of unprecedented technological change.

(Image Credit: UK Government under CC BY 2.0 license)

See also: CMA sets out principles for responsible AI development 

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is co-located with Digital Transformation Week.

Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.

The post UK deputy PM warns UN that AI regulation is falling behind advances appeared first on AI News.

Now the outlines for the AI Act are known, a debate is beginning to erupt around its possible implications. One camp believes regulations are needed to curb the risks of powerful AI technology, while the other is convinced that regulation will prove pernicious for the European economy. Is it out of the question that safe AI products also bring economic prosperity?

‘Industrial revolution’ without Europe

The EU “prevents the industrial revolution from happening” and portrays itself as “no part of the future world,” Joe Lonsdale told Bloomberg. He regularly appears in the US media around AI topics as an outspoken advocate of the technology. According to him, the technology has the potential to cause a third industrial revolution, and every company should already have implemented it in its organization.

He earned a bachelor’s degree in computer science in 2003. Meanwhile, he co-founded several technology companies, including those that deploy artificial intelligence. He later grew to become a businessman and venture capitalist.

The only question is, are the concerns well-founded? At the very least, caution seems necessary to avoid seeing major AI products disappear from Europe. Sam Altman, a better-known IT figure as CEO of OpenAI, previously spoke out about the possible disappearance of AI companies from Europe if the rules become too hard to apply. He does not plan to pull ChatGPT out of Europe because of the AI law, but he warns here of the possible actions of other companies.

ChatGPT stays

The CEO himself is essentially a strong supporter of security legislation for AI. He advocates for clear security requirements that AI developers must meet before the official release of a new product.

When a major player in the AI field calls for regulation of the technology he is working with, perhaps we as Europe should listen. That is what is happening with the AI Act, through which the EU is trying to be the first in the world to put out a set of rules for artificial intelligence. The EU is a pioneer, but it will also have to discover the pitfalls of a policy in the absence of a working example in the world.

The rules will be continuously tested until they officially come into effect in 2025 by experts who publicly give their opinions on the law. A public testing period which AI developers should also find important, Altman said. The European Union also avoids making up rules from higher up for a field it doesn’t know much about itself. The legislation will come bottom-up by involving companies and developers already actively engaged in AI setting the standards.

Copy off

Although the EU often pronounces that the AI law will be the world’s first regulation of artificial intelligence, other places are tinkering with a legal framework just as much. The United Kingdom, for example, is eager to embrace the technology but also wants certainty about its security. To that end, it immerses itself in the technology and gains early access to DeepMind, OpenAI and Anthropic’s models for research purposes.

However, Britain has no plans to punish companies that do not comply. The country limits itself to a framework of five principles that artificial intelligence should comply with. The choice seems to play to the disadvantage of guaranteed safety of AI products, as the country says it is necessary not to make a mandatory political framework for companies, to attract investment from AI companies in the UK. So secure AI products and economic prosperity do not appear to fit well together according to the country. Wait and see if Europe’s AI law validates that.

(Editor’s note: This article first appeared on Techzine)

The post Is Europe killing itself financially with the AI Act? appeared first on AI News.

Representatives from Adobe, Cohere, IBM, Nvidia, Palantir, Salesforce, Scale AI, and Stability attended the White House for the announcement. These eight companies have pledged to play a pivotal role in promoting the development of safe, secure, and trustworthy AI.

The Biden-Harris Administration is actively working on an Executive Order and pursuing bipartisan legislation to ensure the US leads the way in responsible AI development that unlocks its potential while managing its risks.

The commitments made by these companies revolve around three fundamental principles: safety, security, and trust. They have committed to:

1. Ensure products are safe before introduction:

The companies commit to rigorous internal and external security testing of their AI systems before releasing them to the public. This includes assessments by independent experts, helping guard against significant AI risks such as biosecurity, cybersecurity, and broader societal effects.

They will also actively share information on AI risk management with governments, civil society, academia, and across the industry. This collaborative approach will include sharing best practices for safety, information on attempts to circumvent safeguards, and technical cooperation.

2. Build systems with security as a top priority:

The companies have pledged to invest in cybersecurity and insider threat safeguards to protect proprietary and unreleased model weights. Recognising the critical importance of these model weights in AI systems, they commit to releasing them only when intended and when security risks are adequately addressed.

Additionally, the companies will facilitate third-party discovery and reporting of vulnerabilities in their AI systems. This proactive approach ensures that issues can be identified and resolved promptly even after an AI system is deployed.

3. Earn the public’s trust:

To enhance transparency and accountability, the companies will develop robust technical mechanisms – such as watermarking systems – to indicate when content is AI-generated. This step aims to foster creativity and productivity while reducing the risks of fraud and deception.

They will also publicly report on their AI systems’ capabilities, limitations, and areas of appropriate and inappropriate use, covering both security and societal risks, including fairness and bias. Furthermore, these companies are committed to prioritising research on the societal risks posed by AI systems, including addressing harmful bias and discrimination.

These leading AI companies will also develop and deploy advanced AI systems to address significant societal challenges, from cancer prevention to climate change mitigation, contributing to the prosperity, equality, and security of all.

The Biden-Harris Administration’s engagement with these commitments extends beyond the US, with consultations involving numerous international partners and allies. These commitments complement global initiatives, including the UK’s Summit on AI Safety, Japan’s leadership of the G-7 Hiroshima Process, and India’s leadership as Chair of the Global Partnership on AI.

The announcement marks a significant milestone in the journey towards responsible AI development, with industry leaders and the government coming together to ensure that AI technology benefits society while mitigating its inherent risks.

(Photo by Tabrez Syed on Unsplash)

See also: UK’s AI ecosystem to hit £2.4T by 2027, third in global race

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is co-located with Digital Transformation Week.

Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.

The post White House secures safety commitments from eight more AI companies appeared first on AI News.

Porcha Woodruff, an African American woman who was eight months pregnant at the time, is the sixth individual to come forward and report being falsely accused of a crime because of the controversial technology utilised by law enforcement.

Woodruff was accused of robbery and carjacking.

“Are you kidding?” Woodruff claims to have said to the officers, gesturing to her stomach to highlight how nonsensical the allegation was while being eight months pregnant.

The pattern of wrongful arrests based on faulty facial recognition has raised serious concerns, particularly as all six victims known by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have been African Americans. However, Woodruff’s case is notable as she is the first woman to report such an incident happening to her.

This latest incident marks the third known allegation of a wrongful arrest in the past three years attributed to the Detroit Police Department specifically and its reliance on inaccurate facial recognition matches.

Robert Williams, represented by the ACLU of Michigan and the University of Michigan Law School’s Civil Rights Litigation Initiative (CRLI), has an ongoing lawsuit against the DPD for his wrongful arrest in January 2020 due to the same technology.

Phil Mayor, Senior Staff Attorney at ACLU of Michigan, commented: “It’s deeply concerning that the Detroit Police Department knows the devastating consequences of using flawed facial recognition technology as the basis for someone’s arrest and continues to rely on it anyway.

“As Ms Woodruff’s horrifying experience illustrates, the Department’s use of this technology must end.”

The use of facial recognition technology in law enforcement has been a contentious issue, with concerns raised about its accuracy, racial bias, and potential violations of privacy and civil liberties.

Studies have shown that these systems are more prone to errors when identifying individuals with darker skin tones, leading to a disproportionate impact on marginalised communities.

Critics argue that relying on facial recognition as the sole basis for an arrest poses significant risks and can lead to severe consequences for innocent individuals, as seen in the case of Woodruff.

Calls for transparency and accountability have escalated, with civil rights organisations urging the Detroit Police Department to halt its use of facial recognition until the technology is thoroughly vetted and proven to be unbiased and accurate.

“The DPD continues to hide its abuses of this technology, forcing people whose rights have been violated to expose its wrongdoing case by case,” added Mayor.

“DPD should not be permitted to avoid transparency and hide its own misconduct from public view at the same time it continues to subject Detroiters to dragnet surveillance.” 

As the case unfolds, the public remains watchful of how the Detroit Police Department will respond to the mounting pressure to address concerns about the misuse of facial recognition technology and its impact on the rights and lives of innocent individuals.

(Image Credit: Oleg Gamulinskii from Pixabay)

See also: UK will host global AI summit to address potential risks

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The event is co-located with Digital Transformation Week.

Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.

The post Error-prone facial recognition leads to another wrongful arrest appeared first on AI News.

Gensler, who has been vocal about the risks and challenges posed by the cryptocurrency industry, now believes that AI is the technology that “warrants the hype” and deserves greater attention from regulators.

Gensler’s interest in AI dates back to 1997 when he became intrigued by the technology after witnessing Russian chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov’s infamous loss to IBM’s supercomputer, Deep Blue.

As an MIT professor, Gensler delved deeper into the study of AI, co-authoring a significant paper in 2020 that highlighted the risks posed by deep learning in the financial system.

His concern over the potential implications of mass automation using AI in the finance sector has led him to reevaluate regulatory approaches. Gensler believes that while AI can bring immense benefits to financial firms and their clients through enhanced predictive capabilities, it also carries significant risks that need to be addressed.

“Mass automation can have cascading implications for trillions of dollars in assets that trade on markets overseen by the SEC,” warns Gensler.

One of Gensler’s key concerns is the potential use of AI to obscure responsibility and accountability when things go wrong. Coordinating AI models among major trading houses could lead to increased market volatility and instability, a phenomenon that current regulatory regimes might not be equipped to manage.

As a result, Gensler has taken a proactive step by proposing one of the first regulatory frameworks for AI in the finance industry. His proposal requires trading houses and money managers to carefully evaluate their use of AI and predictive data to identify any conflicts of interest, especially when the interests of clients clash with company profits.

However, this shift in focus does not mean the SEC is easing its crackdown on cryptocurrencies.

Under Gensler’s leadership, the SEC has actively pursued legal action against major crypto firms like Ripple, Binance, and Coinbase. Several lawsuits are currently pending, signalling that the SEC remains committed to enforcing its actions against cryptocurrency companies that engage in scams and fraudulent activities.

Gensler’s emphasis on AI comes at a crucial time when the technology is making rapid strides in automating various financial processes.

While AI holds tremendous promise in revolutionising the industry, its unchecked growth could also lead to unforeseen challenges. By directing the SEC’s attention towards AI, Gensler aims to strike a balance between promoting innovation and safeguarding market integrity and investor interests.

(Photo by Petri Heiskanen on Unsplash)

See also: AI Act: The power of open-source in guiding regulations

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The event is co-located with Blockchain Expo.

Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.

The post SEC turns its gaze from crypto to AI appeared first on AI News.

Authors: Sean Musch, AI & Partners and Michael Borrelli, AI & Partners

AI – The opportunity and the challenge

AI currently delivers broad societal benefits, from medical advances to mitigating climate change. As an example, an AI technology developed by DeepMind, a UK- based business, can predict the structure of almost every protein known to science. Government frameworks consider the role of regulation in creating the environment for AI to flourish. AI technologies have not yet reached their full potential. Under the right conditions, AI will transform all areas of life and stimulate economies by unleashing innovation and driving productivity, creating new jobs and improving the workplace.

The UK has indicated a requirement to act quickly to continue to lead the international conversation on AI governance and demonstrate the value of our pragmatic, proportionate regulatory approach. In their report, the UK government identify the short time frame for intervention to provide a clear, pro-innovation regulatory environment in order to make the UK one of the top places in the world to build foundational AI companies. Not too dissimilar to this EU legislators have signalled an intention to make the EU a global hub for AI innovation. On both fronts responding to risk and building public trust are important drivers for regulation. Yet, clear and consistent regulation can also support business investment and build confidence in innovation.

What remains critical for the industry is winning and retaining consumer trust, which is key to the success of innovation economies. Neither the EU nor the UK can afford not to have clear, proportionate approaches to regulation that enable the responsible application of  AI to flourish. Without such consideration, they risk creating cumbersome rules applying to all AI technologies.

What are the policy objectives and intended effects?

Similarities exist in terms of the overall aims. As shown in the table below, the core similarities revolve around growth, safety and economic prosperity:

What are the problems being tackled?

Again, similarities exist in terms of a common focus: the end-user. AI’s involvement in multiple activities of the economy, whether this be from simple chatbots to biometric identification, inevitably mean that end-users end up being affected. Protecting them at all costs seems to be the presiding theme:

What are the differences in policy options?

A variety of options have been considered by the respective policymakers. On the face of it, pro-innovation requires a holistic examination to account for the variety of challenges new ways of working generate. The EU sets the standard with Option 3:

What are the estimated direct compliance costs to firms?

Both the UK Approach and the EU AI Act regulatory framework will apply to all AI systems being designed or developed, made available or otherwise being used in the EU/UK, whether they are developed in the EU/UK or abroad. Both businesses that develop and deploy AI, “AI businesses”, and businesses that use AI, “AI adopting businesses”, are in the scope of the framework. These two types of firms have different expected costs per business under the respective frameworks.

UK Approach: Key assumptions for AI system costs

Key finding: Cost of compliance for HRS highest under Option 3

EU AI Act: Total compliance cost of the five requirements for each AI product

Key finding: Information provision represents the highest cost incurred by firms.

In light of these comparisons, it appears the EU estimates a lower cost of compliance compared to the UK. Lower costs don’t confer a less rigid approach. Rather, they indicate an itemised approach to cost estimation as well as using a standard pricing metric, hours. In practice, firms are likely to aim to make this more efficient by reducing the number of hours required to achieve compliance.

Lessons from the UK Approach for the EU AI Act

The forthcoming EU AI Act is set to place the EU at the global forefront of regulating this emerging technology. Accordingly, models for the governance and mitigation of AI risk from outside the region can still provide insightful lessons for EU decision-makers to learn and issues to account for before the EU AI Act is passed.

This is certainly applicable to Article 9 of the EU AI Act, which requires developers to establish, implement, document, and maintain risk management systems for high-risk AI systems. There are three key ideas for EU decision-makers to consider from the UK Approach.

AI assurance techniques and technical standards

Unlike Article 17 of the EU AI Act, the quality management system put in place by providers of high-risk AI systems is designed to ensure compliance. To do this, providers of high-risk  AI  systems must establish techniques, procedures, and systematic actions to be used for development, quality control, and quality assurance. The EU AI Act only briefly covers the concept of assurance, but it could benefit from publishing assurance techniques and technical standards that play a critical role in enabling the responsible adoption of AI so that potential harms at all levels of society are identified and documented.

To assure AI systems effectively, the UK government is calling for a toolbox of assurance techniques to measure, evaluate, and communicate the trustworthiness of AI systems across the development and deployment life cycle. These techniques include impact assessment, audit, and performance testing along with formal verification methods. To help innovators understand how AI assurance techniques can support wider AI governance, the government launched a ‘Portfolio of AI Assurance techniques’ in Spring 2023. This is an industry collaboration to showcase how these tools are already being applied by businesses to real-world use cases and how they align with the AI regulatory principles.

Similarly, assurance techniques need to be underpinned by available technical standards, which provide a common understanding across assurance providers. Technical standards and assurance techniques will also enable organisations to demonstrate that their systems are in line with the regulatory principles enshrined under the EU AI Act and the UK Approach. Similarities exist in terms of the stage of development.

Specifically, the EU AI Act defines common mandatory requirements applicable to the design and development of certain AI systems before they are placed on the market that will be further operationalised through harmonised technical standards. In equal fashion, the UK government intends to have a leading role in the development of international technical standards, working with industry, international and UK partners. The UK government plans to continue to support the role of technical standards in complementing our approach to AI regulation, including through the UK AI Standards Hub. These technical standards may demonstrate firms’ compliance with the EU AI Act.

A harmonised vocabulary

All relevant parties would benefit from reaching a consensus on the definitions of key terms related to the foundations of AI regulation. While the EU AI Act and the UK Approach are either under development or in the incubation stage, decision-makers for both initiatives should seize the opportunity to develop a shared understanding of core AI ideas, principles, and concepts, and codify these into a harmonised transatlantic vocabulary. As shown below, identification of where both initiatives are in agreement, and where they diverge, has been undertaken:

How AI & Partners can help

We can help you start assessing your AI systems using recognised metrics ahead of the expected changes brought about by the EU AI Act. Our leading practice is geared towards helping you identify, design, and implement appropriate metrics for your assessments.

 Website: https://www.ai-and-partners.com/

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The event is co-located with Digital Transformation Week.

Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.

The post AI regulation: A pro-innovation approach – EU vs UK appeared first on AI News.

The AI Act, set to be a global precedent, aims to address the risks associated with AI while encouraging the development of cutting-edge technology. One of the key aspects of this Act is its support for open-source, non-profit, and academic research and development in the AI ecosystem. Such support ensures the development of safe, transparent, and accountable AI systems that benefit all EU citizens.

Drawing from the success of open-source software development, policymakers can craft regulations that encourage open AI development while safeguarding user interests. By providing exemptions and proportional requirements for open ML systems, the EU can foster innovation and competition in the AI market while maintaining a thriving open-source ecosystem.

Representing both commercial and nonprofit stakeholders, several organisations – including GitHub, Hugging Face, EleutherAI, Creative Commons, and more – have banded together to release a policy paper calling on EU policymakers to protect open-source innovation.

The organisations have five proposals:

1. Define AI components clearly: Clear definitions of AI components will help stakeholders understand their roles and responsibilities, facilitating collaboration and innovation in the open ecosystem.

2. Clarify that collaborative development of open-source AI components is exempt from AI Act requirements: To encourage open-source development, the Act should clarify that contributors to public repositories are not subject to the same regulatory requirements as commercial entities.

3. Support the AI Office’s coordination with the open-source ecosystem: The Act should encourage inclusive governance and collaboration between the AI Office and open-source developers to foster transparency and knowledge exchange.

4. Ensure practical and effective R&D exception: Allow limited real-world testing in different conditions, combining aspects of the Council’s approach and the Parliament’s Article 2(5d), to facilitate research and development without compromising safety and accountability.

5. Set proportional requirements for “foundation models”: Differentiate between various uses and development modalities of foundation models, including open source approaches, to ensure fair treatment and promote competition.

Open-source AI development offers several advantages, including transparency, inclusivity, and modularity. It allows stakeholders to collaborate and build on each other’s work, leading to more robust and diverse AI models. For instance, the EleutherAI community has become a leading open-source ML lab, releasing pre-trained models and code libraries that have enabled foundational research and reduced the barriers to developing large AI models.

Similarly, the BigScience project, which brought together over 1200 multidisciplinary researchers, highlights the importance of facilitating direct access to AI components across institutions and disciplines.

Such open collaborations have democratised access to large AI models, enabling researchers to fine-tune and adapt them to various languages and specific tasks—ultimately contributing to a more diverse and representative AI landscape.

Open research and development also promote transparency and accountability in AI systems. For example, LAION – a non-profit research organisation – released openCLIP models, which have been instrumental in identifying and addressing biases in AI applications. Open access to training data and model components has enabled researchers and the public to scrutinise the inner workings of AI systems and challenge misleading or erroneous claims.

The AI Act’s success depends on striking a balance between regulation and support for the open AI ecosystem. While openness and transparency are essential, regulation must also mitigate risks, ensure standards, and establish clear liability for AI systems’ potential harms.

As the EU sets the stage for regulating AI, embracing open source and open science will be critical to ensure that AI technology benefits all citizens.

By implementing the recommendations provided by organisations representing stakeholders in the open AI ecosystem, the AI Act can foster an environment of collaboration, transparency, and innovation, making Europe a leader in the responsible development and deployment of AI technologies.

(Photo by Nick Page on Unsplash)

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The event is co-located with Digital Transformation Week.

Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.

The post AI Act: The power of open-source in guiding regulations appeared first on AI News.