November 19, 2019
Preparing the Military for a Role on an Artificial Intelligence Battlefield
The Defense Innovation Board—an advisory committee of tech executives, scholars, and technologists—has unveiled its list of ethical principles for artificial intelligence (AI). If adopted by the Defense Department, then the recommendations will help shape the Pentagon’s use of AI in both combat and non-combat systems. The board’s principles are an important milestone that should be celebrated, but the real challenge of adoption and implementation is just beginning. For the principles to have an impact, the department will need strong leadership from the Joint AI Center (JAIC), buy-in from senior military leadership and outside groups, and additional technical expertise within the Defense Department.
In its white paper, the board recognizes that the AI field is constantly evolving and that the principles it proposes represent guidelines the department should aim for as it continues to design and field AI-enabled technologies. The board recommends that the Defense Department should aspire to develop and deploy AI systems that are:
- Responsible. The first principle establishes accountability, putting the onus on the human being for not only the “development, deployment, [and] use” of an AI system, but most importantly, any “outcomes” that system produces. The burden rests on the human being, not the AI.
- Equitable. The second principle calls on the DoD to take “deliberate steps” to minimize “unintended bias” in AI systems. The rise of facial recognition technology and the subsequent issues of algorithmic biases show that the board is right to prioritize mitigating potential biases, particularly as the DoD continues to develop AI systems with national security applications.
- Traceable. The third principle addresses the need for technical expertise within the Defense Department to ensure that AI engineers have an “appropriate understanding of the technology” and the insight of how a system arrives at its outcome.
- Reliable. The board’s fourth principle essentially says that an AI system should do what it has been programmed to do within the domain it has been programmed to operate in. AI engineers should then conduct tests to ensure the “safety, security, and robustness” of the system across its “entire life cycle.”
- Governable. The fifth principle tackles the need for fail-safes in situations where an AI system acts unexpectedly. The AI system should be able to “detect and avoid unintended harm,” and mechanisms should exist that allow “human or automated disengagement” for systems demonstrating “unintended escalatory” behavior.
Read the full article in The National Interest.
More from CNAS
-
Technology & National Security
American AI Companies Can’t Get Enough ChipsExecutive Summary In 2026, artificial intelligence (AI) chip production has become a binding constraint on the pace of the AI compute buildout. Demand for computing power to t...
By James Sanders, Janet Egan & Rory Madigan
-
Technology & National Security
Anthony Vinci on Turning Uncertainty Into Decisions With AI ForecastingAnthony Vinci, CEO of Vico, joins the podcast to explain how AI-powered forecasting can quantify uncertainty and help people make better decisions. Drawing from his background...
By Anthony Vinci
-
Indo-Pacific Security / Technology & National Security
CNAS Insights | Trump Should Talk to Xi About Military AIWhen President Donald Trump goes to China to meet with General Secretary Xi Jinping next month, the leaders of the world’s two superpowers will have much to discuss, with trad...
By Jacob Stokes & Daniel Remler
-
Technology & National Security
The Political Limits of China’s AI Diffusion AmbitionsBeijing’s drive to diffuse AI will increasingly run up against its commitment to employment stability and fear of collective action....
By Ruby Scanlon
