Editor

Letter from CAIDP to the National Security Commission on AI

The full letter with footnotes can be read and downloaded here.

Dear Dr. Schmidt and Hon. Work,

We write to you, on behalf of the Center for AI and Digital Policy (CAIDP), regarding the final report of the National Security Commission on AI. We understand that the Report is still a draft. We have therefore provided recommendations to be incorporated in the final report. We believe it is vitally important for the United States to pursue a policy for artificial intelligence that reflects democratic values.

The Center for AI and Digital Policy was established by the Michael Dukakis Institute to advise national governments on AI and Digital Policy. We have recently published Artificial Intelligence and Democratic Values, a comprehensive report on the AI policies and practices in 30 countries, and the Social Contract for the Age of AI. Regarding the United States, we noted favorably that the US has supported both the OECD AI Principles and the G20 AI Guidelines, two key global frameworks for AI. We also reported on Executive Orders on AI from both the Trump and Obama administrations that support democratic values, as well as a proposed rulemaking by the OMB that will provide an opportunity for public comment on federal AI regulations. And we recently noted legislation in the Congress to establish a national AI strategy for AI that addresses concerns about bias and fairness.

However, in the CAIDP Report, we also expressed concern about the opaque policy process in the United States. We are aware that the National Security Commission on AI had opposed both public participation in meetings and access to agency records until a lawsuit forced the Commission to become more transparent and accountable. We also noted the failure of the Federal Trade Commission to act on several consumer complaints regarding the use of discriminatory AI techniques. And we observed that the United States, alone among democratic nations, lacks a comprehensive federal privacy law and an agency with the specific competence for data protection and the related challenges of AI decision-making. In our rankings, the CAIDP Report placed the United States in Tier III, approximately in the middle of the countries we evaluated across 12 metrics.

Regarding the just released NSCAI Draft Final Report, we want to first acknowledge the substantial work of the Commission over a two-year period on this complex and important issue. The draft Report reflects the extensive work of the Commission on several AI topics of great importance to the United States. We also appreciate the frequent references in the draft Report to “democratic values” as the United States seeks to shape a national AI strategy.10 We specifically endorse the call to promote “human rights and democracy through joint efforts to counter censorship, malign information operations, human trafficking, and illiberal [sic] uses of surveillance technologies.”

We also support the proposal of the Commission to bring together democratic nations in support of the International Digital Democracy Initiative (IDDI). We believe it is vitally important for democratic governments to collaborate on AI policies and practices. And we appreciate the recognition that data minimization techniques are fully compatible with AI innovation, a point that has also been made by Professor Judea Pearl, one of the honorees of the Michael Dukakis Institute.

Still, many of the problems we identified in the CAIDP Report regarding the earlier work of the NSCAI remain. Although we appreciate the brief opportunity to comment on the draft of the final report, there was too little input from the general public in the work of the Commission and too few opportunities for formal comment. The US Commission on AI did not even assess whether the US had taken steps to implement the OECD AI Principles or the G20 AI Guidelines, formal international commitments that the United States has already made. Key challenges, such as the need to update US laws and regulations, were put over for future work by others. As compared with the national AI strategies of other leading democratic nations, this was not sufficient.

We are also concerned by the decision of the Commission not to “support a global prohibition of AI-enabled and autonomous weapon systems.” Although the CAIDP has not yet considered Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS) as a formal criteria in evaluating national AI policies and practices, our recent review of country policies strongly indicates support among democratic nations for limits on these systems. As we noted in our report, “one of the first AI applications to focus the attention of global policymakers was the use of AI for warfare.”

On the use of AI for biometric mass surveillance, such as facial surveillance, we acknowledge that the NSCAI Report discussed applications that clearly violate human rights, such as the surveillance of Uyghers by the Chinese government, but we were disappointed that the Commission did not propose any actual prohibitions on face surveillance in the United States. As you must certainly be aware, there are efforts underway across the United States to prohibit the use of face surveillance. The Facial Recognition and Biometric Technology Moratorium Act, legislation to stop government use of biometric technology, has gained widespread support in Congress.

Regarding the metrics the CAIDP has established to evaluate a country’s AI policies and practices, we specifically advise that the final report of the National Security Commission on AI put forward these recommendations:

  • The United States should implement the OECD AI Principles
  • The United States should establish a process for meaningful public participation in the development of national AI policy
  • The United States should establish an independent agency for AI oversight
  • The United States should establish a right to algorithmic transparency
  • The United States should support the Universal Guidelines for AI
  • The United States should support the Social Contract for AI
  • The United States should establish a data protection agency so that it can participate in the work of the Global Privacy Assembly, and support such initiatives as the GPA Resolution on AI and Ethics (2018) and the GPA Resolution on AI and Accountability (2020)

All of these recommendations follow from the CAIDP’s earlier review of national AI policies and practices, contained in Artificial Intelligence and Democratic Values, and the relevant international AI frameworks and norms. We also strongly recommend that the United States support an International Accord for AI, a recommendation put forward by European Commission President von der Leyen in December 2020. And we would ask you to reconsider the opposition to a ban on lethal autonomous weapons. Several leading experts on AI have expressed grave concerns about the risks associated with autonomous weapons systems.

Finally, we are encouraged by the recent comments of President Biden for the Munich Security Conference. The President called for “rules that will govern the advance of technology and the norms of behavior” for artificial intelligence. President Biden said that technologies such as AI should “lift people up and not pin them down.”

Governor Dukakis has also emphasized the need to ensure that AI policies uphold human rights and the rule of law:

We must also recognize that these choices about AI carry real consequences for the rights and freedoms of citizens. We already see how authoritarian governments can use AI techniques to monitor social protest through facial recognition and analysis of communications and travel records. And once these systems are established, they will be difficult to dismantle. World leaders will need to speak clearly about the need to protect democratic values even as they promote this new technology.

We hope that the changes we propose will be made to the final report of the AI Commission to better reflect the AI priorities of the incoming administration and the aspirations of a democratic nation.

Thank you for your consideration of our views. Sincerely,

Marc Rotenberg
Founder and Director,
Center for AI and Digital Policy

Tuan Nguyen
Director, Michael Dukakis Institute CEO, Boston Global Forum Co-founder, AI World Society

Speaking to G7 Leaders, President Biden Calls for AI Rules that “Lift People Up”

At a virtual meeting of G7 leaders this week, US President Joe Biden called for “rules that will govern the advance of technology and the norms of behavior in cyberspace, artificial intelligence, and biotechnology,” that will “lift people up” and not pin them down. Biden also urged the G7 nations to stand up for democratic values. ”The G7 Leaders Statement, presented at an event hosted at the Munich Security Conference,  further emphasized democratic values as the countries meet to counter the pandemic and to build back better.

In recent years, the G7 (and also the G20) has been a launchpad for new AI initiatives. At the 2018 G7 Summit in Quebec, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and French President Emmanuel Macron proposed a joint international initiative for ethical AI that became the Global Partnership on AI . GPAI’s 15 founding members are Australia, Canada, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Slovenia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union. They were joined by Brazil, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain in December 2020.

Also, speaking to the G20 nations in Osaka in 2019, German Chancellor Angela Merkel called for comprehensive regulation for artificial intelligence. “It will be the job of the next Commission to deliver something so that we have regulation similar to the General Data Protection Regulation that makes it clear that artificial intelligence serves humanity,”  Chancellor Merkel said.  Following the G20, but prior to the pandemic, incoming European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen wrote that “In my first 100 days in office, I will put forward legislation for a coordinated European approach on the human and ethical implications of artificial intelligence.” President von der Leyen later proposed a Transatlantic Agreement on AI at an event hosted by the Michael Dukakis Institute in December 2020. And at the Munich Security Conference, von der Leyen again emphasized a “digital economy rulebook” that is “valid worldwide. A set of rules based on our values: human rights and pluralism, inclusion and the protection of privacy.”

This year, the G7 Leaders Summit takes place in the UK in June 2021. The G20 Summit takes place in Rome in October 2021. The Michael Dukakis Institute has previously advised the G7 leaders about emerging technology policy issues, including cybersecurity and artificial intelligence. Also, the CAIDP report Artificial Intelligence and Democratic Values proposed that implementation of the G20 AI Principles (which are based on the OECD AI Principles) should be one of the twelve metrics to measure progress toward trustworthy and human-centric AI. Additional metrics in the CAIDP report include compliance with international human rights standards, opportunities for public participation in AI policymaking, and algorithmic transparency.

In related news, this week the US National Security Commission on AI released a draft final report. An earlier assessment from the CAIDP, CAIDP Update 1.14 (Oct. 12, 2020), raised concerns about the absence of public participation in the work of the US AI Commission. A more complete assessment from CAIDP will be published soon.

 

Marc Rotenberg, Director

Center for AI and Digital Policy at the Michael Dukakis Institute

The Center for AI and Digital Policy, founded in 2020, advises governments on technology policy.

Forrester: 5 key advances driving AI 2.0

The move AI 2.0 is being driven by five areas of AI advancement, according to a new report from analyst firm Forrester.

“Though you’ve likely never heard of them, these AI 2.0 advances are already entering commercial products, and forward-looking enterprises need to start preparing if they want to reap their competitive advantages,” the report stated.

The first advancement is transformer networks, which are multitasking deep learning models that can be used in problems that have a time or context dimension, such as understanding and generating text or code. It is currently in use in hyper scalers by AWS, Google, IBM, and Microsoft, and by speech and text analytics companies.

The second is synthetic data that is created in simulated virtual environments. This simulated data can be used to create or augment existing training data. Forrester believes synthetic data can be used to accelerate the development of new AI solutions, improve the accuracy of AI models, and protect sensitive data. It is currently being used in autonomous vehicles, financial services, insurance and pharmaceutical firms, and computer vision vendors.

Reinforcement learning is another advancing area of AI that is used to create models that optimize many objectives or constraints, or decide an action based on feedback. It is currently being used by firms dealing with marketing tasks, manufacturing tasks, and robotic learning.

The fourth area, highlighted by Forrester in the report, is federated learning, which is a process for combining models that are trained on separate data sets. It can be used to share information between devices, systems, and companies to overcome privacy, bandwidth, and computational limits, Forrester explained. Currently, federated learning is being leveraged in hyper scalers, AI application vendors, and consumer electronics companies.

The final new emerging AI area is causal inference, which helps determine cause-and-effect relationships. It can be used to obtain business insights and prevent bias by providing explain ability, which Forrester notes can be just as important as prediction accuracy. It is currently being used by innovation teams for use cases such as determining how effective a treatment for a particular disease is.

The article was originally published at SD Times.

Regarding to AI and Causal Inference, Professor Judea Pearl is a distinguished pioneer for developing a theory of causal and counterfactual inference based on structural models. In 2011, Professor Pearl won the Turing Award. In 2020, Michael Dukakis Institute for Leadership and Innovation (MDI) and Boston Global Forum (BGF) also awarded Professor Pearl as World Leader in AI World Society (AIWS). At this moment, Professor Judea is a Mentor of AIWS.net and Head of Modern Causal Inference section, which is one of important AIWS.net.

Leading Mexican Senator Seeks to Promote Internet Access, Limit AI Cancellation

Dr. Ricardo Monreal, the Majority Leader in the Senate of Mexico and a former professor of Constitutional Law, has introduced detailed legislation to update the national Federal Telecommunications and Broadcasting Law to regulate social media. Dr. Monreal pointed to the powerful role of digital platforms, especially social networks, and concerns about freedom of expression and access to the Internet.

Monreal’s Initiative examines the current law on freedom of expression and democracy, the reasons for the new initiative, and the impact on federal agencies in Mexico. According to the Initiative, “those authorized are given the opportunity to use algorithms or automated technologies for the purpose of suspending accounts or deleting content. This is supported by the fact that, given the number of users who have a social network, the authorized users need to optimize times and processes to analyze all the content that is published.”

However, the law would prevent the use of algorithms, or other similar techniques, to permanently cancel accounts. Article 175 states that “The authorized person must create in its internal structure an area that specifically resolves such challenges. For this purpose, it is forbidden for challenges to be resolved through the use of algorithms or any other technology, the authorized person being obliged to have their resolutions issued by individuals duly trained in the field of human rights and freedom of expression.” As Monreal explains, “since it is a fundamental pillar of democracy, such decisions must be taken by qualified personnel.”

Senator Monreal also explains that “the right of access to information and communication technologies, including the internet, has been recognized by the United Nations.” He said that “with regard to freedom of opinion and expression, privacy and other human rights, the potential of the Internet should be realized as a facilitator of development and innovation, with full cooperation between governments, civil society, the private sector, the technical community, and academia.” Monreal proposes also to extend algorithm accountability to other activities, such as transparency measures for online platforms, including the algorithms used for recommendations.

Senator Monreal is encouraging public comment on his proposal. [CAIDP is now promoting this public comment opportunity on the Public Voice page]

The proposal to ensure human review of automated decisions by AI systems that could limit access to the Internet (or make “black box” recommendations) is important and should be considered by other governments that are updating national laws for social media. The Digital Services Act of the EU, for example, proposes similar methods for algorithmic accountability. However, freedom of expression and privacy advocates have expressed concern about a proposal to eliminate  Mexico’s National Institute for Transparency and Access to Information and Data Protection (INAI). The INAI is the leading federal agency in Mexico to promote access to information and to ensure data protection. The INAI a critical mechanism to ensure AI accountability.

 

Announcements

 

Marc Rotenberg, Director

Center for AI and Digital Policy at Michael Dukakis Institute

The Center for AI and Digital Policy, founded in 2020, advises governments on technology policy.

AI-powered healthcare isn’t without pitfalls, but its potential is vast

Algorithms are poised to change everything about keeping people healthy—including patients who might never have the opportunity to see a human doctor.

Anybody with even the vaguest interest in politics and economics will recognize that the provision of healthcare is one of the most important global financial problems for private citizens and for governments. On the one hand, improvements in healthcare provision over the past two centuries are probably the most important single achievement of the scientific method in the industrialized world: In 1800, life expectancy for someone in Europe would have been less than 50 years; someone born in Europe today could reasonably expect to live late into their seventies. Of course, these improvements in healthcare and life expectancy have not yet found their way to all parts of the globe, but overall, the trend is positive, and this is, of course, a cause for celebration.

But these welcome advances have created challenges. First, populations are, on average, becoming older. And older people typically require more healthcare than younger people, which means that the overall cost of healthcare has risen. Second, as we develop new drugs and treatments for diseases and other afflictions, the overall range of conditions that we can treat increases—which also leads to additional healthcare costs. And of course, a key underlying reason for the expense of healthcare is that the resources required to deliver healthcare are expensive, and people with the skill and qualifications to do so are scarce.

Because of these problems, healthcare—and more particularly funding for healthcare—is everywhere a perennial issue for politicians to wrangle with. Wouldn’t it be wonderful, then, if there were a technological fix to the healthcare problem?

The idea of AI (artificial intelligence) for healthcare is nothing new—the seminal MYCIN expert system was widely acclaimed after demonstrating better-than-human performance when diagnosing the causes of blood diseases in humans. No surprise, then, that MYCIN was followed by a wave of similar healthcare-related expert systems, although it is fair to say that relatively few of these made it far from their research labs. But nowadays, interest in AI for healthcare is back with a vengeance, and this time, there are several developments that suggest it has a better chance of succeeding on a large scale.

This article was originally published here.

According to Artificial Intelligence World Society Innovation Network (AIWS.net), AI can be an important tool for helping people achieve well-being and happiness, relieve them of resource constraints and arbitrary/inflexible rules and processes. In this effort, Michael Dukakis Institute for Leadership and Innovation (MDI) invites participation and collaboration with think tanks, universities, non-profits, firms, and other entities that share its commitment to the constructive and development of full-scale AI for world society.

Canadian Privacy Commissioners Determines that Clearview is Illegal

The Canadian Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien, joined by the privacy commissioners of Alberta, British Columbia, and Quebec, has determined that the facial surveillance company Clearview has violated Canadian privacy law.

In a statement on February 3, 3021, Therrien explained, “Clearview sells a facial recognition tool that allows law enforcement and commercial organizations to match photographs of unknown people against a massive databank of 3 billion images, scraped from the Internet. The vast majority of these people have never been, and will never be, implicated in any crime.” Therrien continued, “What Clearview does is mass surveillance and it is illegal. It is an affront to individuals’ privacy rights and inflicts broad-based harm on all members of society, who find themselves continually in a police lineup. This is completely unacceptable.”

The extensive investigation found numerous violation of Canadian federal and provincial laws. The Canadian officials recommended that Clearview (1) “cease offering the service” in Canada, (2) cease the collection, use and disclosure of images and biometric facial arrays collected from individuals in Canada, and (3) delete images and biometric facial arrays collected from individuals in Canada in its possession.

The Clearview decision in Canada occurs with growing focus on the use of AI techniques for facial surveillance — the use of facial recognition for mass surveillance — around the world. Reuters reports that Russian authorities are deploying facial recognition cameras in Moscow to identify protesters during rallies in support of Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny, with human rights groups warning that the technology is being used to stifle peaceful dissent. With support from the European Commission, Greece is planning to deploy a live facial recognition this summer, though there are multiple concerns around the GDPR, the Greek Constitution, and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. There are ongoing concerns about the use of facial surveillance in China, particularly as it is directed toward ethnic minorities and political opponents. The Council of Europe has recently proposed a ban on facial recognition techniques. And the ReclaimYourFace coalition has launched a European Citizen Initiative to ban biometric mass surveillance.

In the 2020 report Artificial Intelligence and Democratic Values, the CAIDP found that “facial surveillance” is a red line for AI deployment, and recommended that countries “halt the use of facial recognition for mass surveillance.”

 

Marc Rotenberg, Director,

Center for AI and Digital Policy at the Michael Dukakis Institute

The Center for AI and Digital Policy, founded in 2020, advises governments on technology policy

Causality Link Partners with Eagle Alpha to Supply Data from AI-Powered “Research Assistant” Platform

Causality Link, an advanced, AI-driven financial information technology provider, and Eagle Alpha, the pioneer connecting the universe of alternative data, today announced the addition of Causality Link’s data to Eagle Alpha’s library of alternative data supplied to asset managers, private equity professionals and corporate enterprises.

In this partnership, Causality Link will make available its data from Research Assistant, the firm’s AI-powered platform that processes and analyzes more than 90 million texts globally in real time to identify explicit cause-and-effect statements. Reading texts in 24 languages, Research Assistant aggregates the knowledge of thousands of authors into a single deductive system, allowing portfolio managers, analysts and corporates to understand the KPIs, events, trends and causal links that reveal the market forces acting over time on a commodity, equity, portfolio, sector or industry. The feed also includes comprehensive data on ten subcategories related to the environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors for public companies worldwide.

Established in 2012, Eagle Alpha is a pioneer in the alternative data universe. The firm was one of the first to understand the value of non-traditional data sources and now has access to nearly 1,500  global datasets, providing knowledge and solutions to top buy-side clients and a variety of leading businesses.

With its advanced AI-driven research platform, Causality Link helps investment research professionals produce smarter decisions by better understanding the “causal links” between their subjects and various market indicators. Causality Link was formed on the notion that long-term success in AI and Machine Learning requires a balance of human and machine collaboration that leverages the strongest qualities in each. Causality Link’s platform merges explicit expert knowledge of causation – not simply correlation – with the mathematical power of predictive analytics enabling professionals to gain big-picture understanding of the financial markets.

The original article was published here.

In the field of AI and Causal techniques, Professor Judea Pearl is a distinguished pioneer for developing a theory of causal and counterfactual inference based on structural models. In 2011, Professor Pearl won the Turing Award. In 2020, Michael Dukakis Institute for Leadership and Innovation (MDI) and Boston Global Forum (BGF) also awarded Professor Pearl as World Leader in AI World Society (AIWS). At this moment, Professor Judea is a Mentor of AIWS.net and Head of Modern Causal Inference section, which is one of important AIWS.net.

Nguyen Anh Tuan presented the AI International Accord Initiative at the 14th Computers, Privacy, and Data Protection Conference

On January 28, 2021, Mr. Nguyen Anh Tuan, CEO of the Boston Global Forum presented AI International Accord Initiative at the panel “Toward an International Accord on AI”, together with

Marit Hansen, State Data Protection Commissioner of Land Schleswig-Holstein (Germany); Eva Kalli, MEP (EU), Malavika Jayaram, Digital Asia Hub (Hong Kong)

Here is Tuan presentation:

  1. Scope:
  • To create a framework for the AI International Accord
  • To establish a Democratic Alliance on Digital Governance in order to support the AI International Accord and Social Contract for the AI Age
  • To frame a Monitoring System that observes governments and big tech companies in uses and abuses of AI and notable violations of AI International Accord and of Social Contract for the AI Age.
  • To practice the Framework at AIWS City

 

  1. Key concepts and content of AI International Accord (AIIA):

Among the key topics for discussion will be:

– The current legal frameworks for AI and the essential elements of a global AI legal framework.

– Responsibilities of governments and companies in protecting data and privacy

– Preventing abuses by governments and businesses in AI, Data, Digital Technology, Cyberspace, including attacking companies, organizations, and individuals on the Internet.

– Creating norms to manage robotics and cyber-security

– Protecting Social Contract for the AI Age, democratic values, transparency, and accountability while ensuring equal opportunities across the socio-economic landscape.

– Collaboration and responsibility between governments and businesses in preventing international cybercrimes and criminals.

– Punishing governments and businesses which violate AI International Accord and/or Social Contract for the AI Age.

 

 

  1. Process:
  • AIIA Team create a Framework
  • Discussion:

+ AIIA Panels organized by Boston Global Forum and Michael Dukakis Institute

+ Quad Roundtables organized by Boston Global Forum and Riga Conference 2021

  • Connect with governments and international organizations
  • Set up alliances to implement and practice
  • Practice at AIWS City
  1. Endorse:
  • First step: Quad group and EU
  • Second step: OECD countries
  • Third step: United Nations
  • Fourth step: Russia and China

 

  1. Host and Partners:

Host: Boston Global Forum and Michael Dukakis Institute

 

Partners:

World Leadership Alliance-Club de Madrid

Riga Conference 2021

United Nations Academic Impact

 

Potential Partners:

European Commission

US, Japan, Australia, India, Sweden, Latvia Governments

 

 

Timeline of key events:

Quad Roundtable April, 2021

AIIA

 

Riga Conference 2021

Session about AIIA

 

World Leadership Alliance – Club de Madrid, September 2021

World Leaders and AIIA

AIWS City as the place to apply and respect AIIA

 

Boston Global Forum December 12, 2021

Announce the AIIA Accord and present World Leader for Peace and Security 2021 who made significant contributions to AIIA

 

 

 

  1. Leaders: Governor Michael Dukakis, President Ursula von der Leyen

 

  1. Team:

– Nazli Choucri

– Tuan Nguyen

– Thomas Patterson

– David Silbersweig

– Merve Hickok

– Alex Sandy Pentland

– Vint Cerf

– Prime Minister Zlatko Lagumdzija

– President Vaira Vike-Freiberga,

– Prime Minister Esko Aho,

– Yasuhide Nakayama

– Douglas Frantz

– P.S Raghavan

– Kimberley Kitching

– Zaneta Ozolina

– Stavros Lambrinidis

– Judea Pearl

– Randall Davis

 

Assistants:  Sandis Sraders, Larissa Zutter, Minh Nguyen

 

 

Official Online Host of events and discussions:

AIWS Palace at AIWS City

CAIDP panel at the Computers, Privacy and Data Protection Conference

On January 28, 2021, the Center for AI and Digital Policy (CAIDP) at Michael Dukakis Institute organized the TOWARD AN INTERNATIONAL ACCORD ON AI Panel at  the 14th Computers, Privacy, and Data Protection Conference at Brussels.

Moderator Marc Rotenberg, CAIDP (US)

Speakers: Nguyen Anh Tuan, Michael Dukakis Institute (US); Malavika Jayaram, Digital Asia Hub (HK); Marit Hansen, State Data Protection Commissioner of Land Schleswig-Holstein (DE); Eva Kalli, MEP (EU)

There is growing support for an international legal framework for AI. In 2019, the OECD countries announced the AI Principles, which were then adopted by the G-20 nations. In 2020, the European Commission proposed a Transatlantic Agreement on AI. And in 2021, the Council of Europe is likely to propose an International treaty for AI, similar to the COE Privacy Convention, on January 25, 2021, Boston Global Forum and Michael Dukakis Institute announced AI International Accord Intiative.

All of this AI policy activity points toward the establishment of an International Accord on AI. This panel will explore

the current state of affairs and the next steps.

  • What are the current legal frameworks for AI?
  • What are the essential elements of a global AI legal framework?
  • What are the plans to establish an International accord on AI?

Mr. Marc Rotenberg, Director of CAIDP presented AI Social Contract Index – AI and Democratic Values. Mr. Nguyen Anh Tuan, Director of MDI presented AI International Accord Initiative at the panel.