WPF provides comments on U.S. AI Action Plan; urges support for NIST AISIC and advancing trustworthy metrology of AI governance tools

WPF provided comments to the U.S. National Science Foundation and the Office of Science and Technology Policy regarding its priorities for the U.S. AI Action Plan. WPF’s comments focused on 4 key points around trustworthy AI:

– Prioritize support for NIST’s AI Safety Institute Consortium and participate in the growing and influential global network of AISIs.

– Prioritize the advancement of AI governance tools by supporting AI governance tools research and development.

– Prioritize advancing the trustworthy metrology of AI governance tools, including tools associated with effectuating privacy in AI systems, by supporting the building of an evaluative environment and evidentiary foundation with which AI governance tools themselves can be tested, improved, and validated.

– Prioritize and support the use of Voluntary Consensus Standards by the FDA for AI-enabled medical devices and also support study of AI governance tools that monitor AI-enabled medical devices.

WPF comments in full:

WPF comments regarding the U.S. AI Action Plan (PDF, 5 pages)

Related WPF documents and materials:

Posted March 22, 2025 in AI, AI and Privacy, AI Governance, AI Governance Tools, NIST AISIC, Public Comments

Global Table of Countries with Data Privacy Laws, Treaties, or Conventions

To see the research and use this data visualization: Each...
Report: Risky Analysis: Assessing and Improving AI Governance Tools

We are pleased to announce the publication of a new WPF report, “Risky Analysis: Assessing and Improving AI Governance Tools.” This report sets out a definition of AI governance tools, documents why and how these tools are critically important for trustworthy AI, and where these tools are around the world. The report also documents problems in some AI governance tools themselves, and suggests pathways to improve AI governance tools and create an evaluative environment to measure their effectiveness. AI systems should not be deployed without simultaneously evaluating the potential adverse impacts of such systems and mitigating their risks, and most of the world agrees about the need to take precautions against the threats posed. The specific tools and techniques that exist to evaluate and measure AI systems for their inclusiveness, fairness, explainability, privacy, safety and other trustworthiness issues — called in the report collectively AI governance tools – can improve such issues. While some AI governance tools provide reassurance to the public and to regulators, the tools too often lack meaningful oversight and quality assessments. Incomplete or ineffective AI governance tools can create a false sense of confidence, cause unintended problems, and generally undermine the promise of AI systems. The report contains rich background details, use cases, potential solutions to the problems discussed in the report, and a global index of AI Governance Tools.
National IDs Around the World — Interactive map

About this Data Visualization: This interactive map displays the presence...