Search

Begin New Search Topic Artificial Intelligence Publication Year within 3 Years

111. Competition in generative artificial intelligence foundation models

Author:
Christophe Carugati
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Foundation models (FMs) are the origin of breakthrough innovations in generative artificial intelligence (AI) applications, such as ChatGPT. Only responsible developments in competitive markets can help ensure that FMs deliver their full benefits at minimum risk. FM developers require language models (LMs), data and computing power to generate natural language output, such as texts, from language input. Thus, the FM value chain is composed of three main elements: LMs, data and computing resources. These markets are currently competitive, with multiple providers and degrees of openness thanks to several closed- and open-source models, open-source and proprietary data, and vigorous competition between firms at the computing-resources level, despite high degrees of concentration in some of these markets. These market characteristics ensure that FM developers face low or surmountable entry barriers. Still, potential competition issues are likely to arise in the future. Dominant firms could leverage their dominant positions, refuse to give access to their LMs, scrape data, refuse to grant access to data, impose undue barriers to switching and lock their users into their ecosystems. Firms could also use LMs to achieve an anticompetitive agreement through algorithmic collusion. Competition authorities should focus their efforts on short-term risks. They should also remain vigilant in terms of ensuring the competitive process between open- and closed-source models works and that open-source developers and public authorities do not impose undue restrictions to mitigate the risks of open-source models, which would deter their development in a way that would favour closed-source models. Finally, at this development stage, studies are lacking. Researchers and competition authorities should investigate the impact of fms on content providers and the digital advertising industry, the role of FMs in digital ecosystems, and cooperation mechanisms between competent authorities across regulatory fields and countries.
Topic:
Digital Economy, Artificial Intelligence, Competition, and ChatGPT
Political Geography:
Global Focus

112. Where next for the Australia–South Korea partnership?

Author:
Afeeya Akhand and Alex Bristow
Publication Date:
10-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI)
Abstract:
The strategic partnership between Australia and South Korea holds great potential in an increasingly challenging time. The two nations have many common strategic interests and both can rightly claim to be regional powers. However, the relationship remains a relative underperformer compared with other key regional relationships and has suffered from inconsistency. When Canberra’s contemporary relationship with Seoul receives attention from Australian analysts, it tends to be framed largely in the context of the threats posed by Pyongyang. While some uncertainties remain over the long-term trajectory of South Korea’s foreign and security policy due to concerns that Seoul’s current vision is tied to the Yoon government as opposed to being embedded in longer-term statecraft, the structural basis for deeper engagement between Seoul and Canberra is sound. Investing in the relationship is in both nations’ interests. Building bureaucratic and commercial frameworks for cooperation now would help ensure that bilateral strategic alignment is less prone to future changes in government. This paper assesses the Australia–South Korea partnership through the three-pillar structure outlined in the 2021 Australia-South Korea Comprehensive Strategic Partnership and offers recommendations for strengthening the relationship. These recommendations include furthering strategic cooperation by incrementally aligning key trilateral formats, developing bilateral cooperation in critical technologies including those relevant to AUKUS Pillar 2, and nurturing collaboration with respect to the Indo-Pacific clean energy transition.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, NATO, Partnerships, Artificial Intelligence, ASEAN, AUKUS, and ANZUS
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, and Australia

113. Australia's semiconductor manufacturing moonshot: securing semiconductor talent

Author:
Bronte Munro, Alex Capri, and Robert Clark
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI)
Abstract:
Semiconductors are a critical component in all modern technologies, from personal communication devices and medical devices to weapons systems. Crucial to producing semiconductors is the availability of a highly skilled workforce, managing clean-room facilities and highly specialised equipment to execute the hundreds of unique steps needed to manufacture a single wafer, depending on the complexity of the chip. ASPI’s 2022 report, Australia’s semiconductor national moonshot, laid out the strategic reasons why Australia must embark on a capacity-building initiative to create a homegrown semiconductor manufacturing ecosystem. Every item on the Australian federal government’s List of Critical Technologies in the National Interest is dependent on semiconductors. By committing to growing a semiconductor-manufacturing industry from a mature-process-scale baseline, policymakers would position Australia to manufacture chips relevant to the energy, transport, health, IT and defence sectors. Such an industry would enable Australia to execute long-term critical technology strategies in areas such as quantum computing and artificial intelligence, to mitigate supply-chain risk against disruption from conflict or natural disaster, and provide highly skilled jobs in affordable locations, enriching the Australian economy. It’s important to note that both AUKUS Pillar 2 and the Albanese government’s April 2023 publication of the Defence Strategic Review reflect a shift in Australia’s strategic thinking on defence and national security, and the important correlation and greater cooperation between industry, education and defence priorities, particularly when it comes to technology. Delivering on that shift will be difficult and often costly, but this report provides a series of recommendations of what that correlation and cooperation could look like. For Canberra, such an endeavour is of the same magnitude as America’s historic ‘moonshots’ during the 1960s and 1970s. It’s a once-in-a-generation challenge that will determine Australia’s place in the world, and human capital is central to ensuring success. Opting out of semiconductor manufacturing for the long term would severely constrain Australia’s growth as a technological nation and consign it to second-tier status. This report expands on the recommendations made in the 2022 ASPI report for establishing a semiconductor-manufacturing capability in Australia and focuses on the importance of creating a talent pipeline that can support a scaled industry. Achieving a semiconductor moonshot requires stepping up Australia’s very respectable semiconductor device fabrication R&D to industry-compatible prototyping via a dedicated facility, together with attracting (through that capability and by government incentives) a semiconductor manufacturer to locate a mature-process-scale foundry in Australia—which will require support from an upskilled Australian talent pipeline. This is an ambitious move but is an essential step in growing such a capability. The ability to grow and maintain a high-skilled workforce is a foundational challenge for Australia that can be addressed through close examination of trailblazing public–private partnerships (PPPs) that aim to provide talent-pipeline security in the US, Taiwan and Japan. Australian governments, industry and academia can emulate and engage with the examples highlighted through case studies in this report to attract semiconductor industry investment, boost talent-pipeline development and strengthen industry R&D. Australia’s states and territories all have varied capacity to o›er support to a semiconductor-manufacturing capability.
Topic:
Cybersecurity, Manufacturing, Artificial Intelligence, Emerging Technology, and Semiconductors
Political Geography:
Australia

114. Biosecurity in the Age of AI: What’s the Risk?

Author:
Janet Egan and Eric Rosenbach
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
Abstract:
“The biggest issue with AI is actually going to be … its use in biological conflict,” according to former Google CEO, Eric Schmidt.[1] And he’s not the only AI expert worried. In his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law, the CEO of Anthropic, Dario Amodei, warned that in just two to three years, AI has the potential to “greatly widen the range of actors with the technical capability to conduct a large-scale biological attack.”[2] OpenAI’s Sam Altman has called for regulation on AI models “that could help create novel biological agents.”[3]President Biden’s recent Executive Order on Safe, Secure and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence explicitly tasks relevant agencies with assessing the ways in which AI can increase, and potentially help mitigate, biosecurity risks.[4]But what exactly has experts and officials so worried?
Topic:
Defense Policy, Science and Technology, Biosecurity, and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
Global Focus

115. Generative AI and the Future of Work: A Reappraisal

Author:
Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael Osborne
Publication Date:
09-2023
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
Like now, the early 2010s was a time of excitement about new technological wonders. The world had bounced back from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression and, despite residual financial malaise, America seemed to be on the cusp of a productivity boom.1 Artificial intelligence (AI), long regarded as an academic backwater, was finally bearing fruit. In 2011, a question-answering computer system known as IBM Watson beat the world champion in Jeopardy. Machine learning—a subfield of AI—further expanded the possibilities of what computers could do; in 2012, a machine learning team from Google trained a deep neural network that, without ever being told what a cat was, proved independently capable of recognizing cat videos on YouTube. Gone were the days when a computer programmer needed to write explicit rules to guide the actions of a machine in every contingency. Computers could now infer rules by tapping into the data trails left behind by increasing numbers of humans online. This phenomenon was most clearly visible with the development of autonomous vehicles. No programmer could be expected to foresee every situation a human driver might encounter in city traffic, and even less to capture these in a sequence of “If-Then-Do” commands. Instead, autonomous vehicles made progress by collecting vast amounts of data on drivers’ actions in city traffic to predict what humans would in any given situation.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Artificial Intelligence, Future of Work, and Generative Models
Political Geography:
Global Focus

116. Table for Twelve: Dinner with the Foremost Experts on AI

Author:
Mike Sexton, Fredrick Hernandez, and Jim Kessler
Publication Date:
12-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Third Way
Abstract:
We’re all trying to get smarter on AI. Well, suppose you could have dinner with some of the smartest experts on AI and get their take? Pull up a chair. We chose 11 AI thinkers—AI creators, defense experts, economists, academicians, tech capitalists, and sociologists—and condensed their viewpoints into 500 words with a link to go deeper. Some are true AI believers, others are deep skeptics, many fall in between. Why 11? So you could be number 12. Would you like red or white with your bots? This is the first product in a multi-year series to help educate decision-makers on the policy choices confronting Congress and the Administration on next generation Artificial Intelligence. Each summary represents our interpretation of their outlook based on published interviews and writings and have not been approved or edited by each individual.
Topic:
Defense Policy, National Security, Science and Technology, and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
Global Focus

117. Awareness of artificial intelligence: Diffusion of information about AI versus ChatGPT in the United States

Author:
Rajeev K. Goel and Michael A. Nelson
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:
This paper addresses the awareness about the artificial intelligence across states in the United States. We uniquely create indices of Google internet search results for general AI awareness and about ChatGPT, normalizing alternatively by internet users and land area. An understanding of the awareness about AI would provide useful insights into regulatory attempts to monitor and guard the AI technologies, besides suggesting alternatives for laggard states to catch up. Econometric results to explain the drivers of AI awareness show that, ceteris paribus, more prosperous states had greater awareness about AI and ChatGPT. On the other hand, states with greater economic freedom had a lower awareness. States with more men to women has lower AI awareness when hits were normalized by area, but the reverse was true when weighted by internet users. States with a higher proportion of the elderly population were no different from the other states, while those with greater urbanization had more AI/ChatGPT awareness when the internet hits were weighted by land area. Finally, states bordering Canada were no different from other states, while states bordering Mexico generally had a lower AI/ChatGPT awareness.
Topic:
Urbanization, Innovation, Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Digitalization, Gender, and ChatGPT
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

118. The Trilateral Security Dialogue, Defence Cooperation, & Artificial Intelligence

Author:
Aiden Warren, Charles T. Hunt, and Matthew Warren
Publication Date:
08-2023
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Australian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
This report investigates the prospects and difficulties of enhancing AI cooperation among Australia, Japan, and the United States under the Trilateral Security Dialogue (TSD) framework. Significant overlap in national AI objectives and vision, along with shared understandings of global AI competition and the security implications of AI development, exist among the TSD members. Insights from consultations and workshops with various stakeholders in Washington D.C. reveal a strong appetite for further cross-border collaboration in AI. However, several challenges persist across common standards, interoperability, trust, awareness, export control regimes, and data governance. The report, the first in a series, outlines key areas for building a robust and resilient AI partnership that can address the security challenges and opportunities in the Indo-Pacific region.
Topic:
International Relations, Science and Technology, Artificial Intelligence, and Security Cooperation
Political Geography:
Japan, Australia, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

119. Digital Surveillance in Serbia

Author:
Belgrade Centre for Security Policy (BCSP)
Publication Date:
07-2023
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Belgrade Centre for Security Policy (BCSP)
Abstract:
People’s ever-stronger reliance on digital technologies and devices has caused states and private actors to increasingly reach for various systems and tools for the digital surveillance of citizens. Consequently, high-resolution cameras, artificial intelligence, programmes for biometric recognition, tools for automatic data collection from the Internet, and intrusive software for monitoring mobile phones have become the everyday reality of people worldwide. The spread of digital surveillance in Serbia is highly non-transparent, and especially dangerous since Serbia has been assessed as a captured state characterised by the abuse of state resources for the sake of personal and party interests. Although the reports by the media and investigative journalists are important, they are focused on individual cases, which makes it difficult to get a broader picture of the scale of the digital surveillance problem in Serbia based on them. That is why it is important, starting from the existing reports, to map the digital surveillance infrastructure in Serbia, i.e. to make a list of digital surveillance equipment and programmes the state institutions have acquired, determine whether they are competent and authorised to use them, and how these technologies are misused. Since Serbia is striving to become a member of the European Union (EU), it is also important to show how the EU is attempting to regulate this area.
Topic:
Science and Technology, European Union, Surveillance, Institutions, and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
Europe and Serbia

120. Mind the Gap: The Challenges of Assurance for Artificial Intelligence

Author:
Isaac Gazendam and Philip Dawson
Publication Date:
11-2023
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), Stanford University
Abstract:
Artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities have progressed rapidly since defeating human players at board games. From voice assistants to chatbots, image filters to multi-modal content generation, AI is accelerating individual, commercial, and scientific purposes. The development of increasingly advanced AI systems, each with unique strengths and vulnerabilities, has also made assessing and managing AI risk a daunting prospect. Controls do exist. A variety of stakeholders have made strides in proposing tools and methods to govern AI systems. A common approach applied across these attempts is based on assurance, a collection of approaches and techniques that aim to measure the quality, reliability, and trustworthiness of AI products, services, organizations, or professionals. To some extent, governments are relying on assurance-based approaches to govern AI – from assessments and audit to certification – regardless of whether they have plans to develop AI regulations. Yet the AI assurance ecosystem remains nascent. Frameworks for AI assessments and audits are still evolving, as are supporting standards and accreditation criteria for third-party auditors, reviewers and evaluators. In some cases, it is now possible to apply certain assurance mechanisms to the governance of narrower applications of AI and related organizational processes. However, assurance-based approaches to more advanced systems based on large language models (LLMs) or generative models remain in their infancy.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Governance, Regulation, Artificial Intelligence, and Large Language Models (LLMs)
Political Geography:
Global Focus