Overview
Title
To require systematic review of artificial intelligence systems before deployment by the Federal Government, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
S. 5539 is a plan to make sure that before the government uses any smart computer systems (called AI), they check if they are safe and fair. The goal is for the government to use these systems responsibly and tell everyone how they are doing it.
Summary AI
S. 5539, also known as the “Trustworthy By Design Artificial Intelligence Act of 2024” or the “TBD AI Act of 2024,” proposes the development of systematic guidelines for evaluating the trustworthiness of artificial intelligence (AI) systems before they are deployed by the Federal Government. The bill mandates that the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology create guidelines covering aspects like safety, security, transparency, fairness, and bias. It also requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing and new AI systems according to these guidelines, designate a Chief Artificial Intelligence Officer responsible for oversight, and report their findings and compliance to Congress. The bill aims to ensure responsible and transparent use of AI systems while addressing potential risks.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill titled "Trustworthy By Design Artificial Intelligence Act of 2024," introduced in the Senate, aims to ensure the safe and reliable deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) systems by the federal government. It sets out to establish guidelines for assessing the trustworthiness of AI systems before they are deployed. This involves developing a comprehensive set of criteria covering various aspects such as safety, security, fairness, and transparency. It also mandates designating Chief AI Officers in federal agencies to oversee AI implementations, ensuring rigorous evaluation and compliance with these guidelines.
Summary of Significant Issues
A key issue with the bill is its definition of terms like "artificial intelligence system," which appears overly broad and ill-defined. This vagueness can lead to inconsistencies in how different federal agencies apply the guidelines, potentially resulting in loopholes.
Moreover, the bill lacks specifics on the budget and resources required for developing and enforcing these guidelines, posing a risk of unplanned expenditures. It also does not outline a process for public consultation when creating these guidelines, which might lead to a lack of transparency and limited stakeholder engagement.
In Section 4, ambiguities pertaining to what constitutes a "covered use" of AI, along with the broad exemptions allowed at the discretion of the Director, can lead to uneven enforcement and potentially suboptimal oversight.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, if well-implemented, this bill could enhance the safety and reliability of AI systems used by the federal government, potentially increasing public trust in AI technology and federal operations. By mandating evaluations focused on fairness, bias, and transparency, it seeks to protect public interests by ensuring that AI systems operate equitably and justly.
However, the lack of clarity and defined resources could lead to inefficiencies and uneven application, causing delays and inconsistencies in how AI systems are utilized across various federal agencies. This might result in public skepticism over the federal government's ability to manage AI technologies effectively.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For federal agencies, the bill imposes new regulatory demands, requiring them to adapt to guidelines for AI system deployment and appoint Chief AI Officers rapidly. This could bring about operational and staffing challenges, particularly if qualifications for these roles remain unspecified or if current staffing doesn't align with the new requirements.
AI developers and companies working with the government are likely to face increased scrutiny and stringent evaluation processes. While this could assure that only high-quality, trust-worthy AI systems are deployed, it might also slow down the pace of innovation and deployment in the public sector due to the added layers of compliance.
Academia and civil society organizations could be positively impacted by this bill as it opens opportunities for them to collaborate in evaluating AI systems. However, the lack of defined input channels might limit the extent to which these groups can influence the guidelines.
In summary, while the bill takes an important step toward ensuring the responsible use of AI by the government, its effectiveness hinges on addressing the identified issues, especially in providing clear definitions, process transparency, and adequate resources for implementation.
Issues
The broad and possibly vague definitions of key terms such as 'artificial intelligence system' and 'Federal agency' in Section 2 could lead to regulatory inconsistencies, loopholes, and challenges in applying the law uniformly across different agencies and contexts.
Section 3 lacks clear specifications of anticipated costs or budgeting needed for developing, implementing, and maintaining the guidelines for AI trustworthiness evaluation, which could lead to unaccounted financial expenditures and inefficiencies in resource allocation.
The absence of a defined process for public engagement or consultation in Section 3 when developing AI trustworthiness guidelines risks a lack of transparency and inclusivity, limiting broader stakeholder input and potential public trust.
Ambiguities in Section 4, such as the criteria for 'covered use' exemptions and the reliance on the Director's subjective determination, pose risks for inconsistent applications of AI system evaluations and deployments across federal agencies, potentially undermining the intent of uniform AI oversight.
There is no mechanism in Section 3 for oversight or enforcement of the developed guidelines, leading to concerns about compliance and the practical impact of the guidelines on AI system deployment within federal agencies.
Section 4 sets challenging timelines for agencies to comply with guidelines, including the requirement to have Chief Artificial Intelligence Officers in place within 120 days, potentially creating operational and staffing pressures without clear guidance on qualifications or support.
The Bill does not address specific resources or supports that agencies would need to ensure compliance with new AI system regulations (Section 4), potentially leading to disparities in implementation and effectiveness across different federal agencies.
The lack of detailed provisions for evaluating compliance with the AI guidelines in Section 4, or public transparency mechanisms to ensure unbiased assessments, could hinder open accountability and trust in federal AI system deployments.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of this Act establishes its short title, which is the “Trustworthy By Design Artificial Intelligence Act of 2024” or simply the “TBD AI Act of 2024”.
2. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides definitions for terms used in the Act, including "artificial intelligence system," which refers to a machine-based system capable of making predictions or decisions, "Director," which refers to the head of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and "Federal agency," which refers to any department or agency within the federal government.
3. Guidelines for evaluation of trustworthiness of artificial intelligence systems Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines that within one year, guidelines must be developed to evaluate how trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI) systems are. These guidelines will focus on various aspects such as the AI models, the data used, and possible risks, ensuring attributes like safety, security, and fairness are considered. There will be periodic updates and collaboration with various stakeholders. Additionally, a report will be submitted to Congress about any challenges faced in implementing these guidelines.
4. Federal deployment of artificial intelligence systems Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines rules for using artificial intelligence (AI) in federal agencies, requiring evaluations to ensure compliance with new guidelines, designating Chief AI Officers within 120 days for oversight, and mandates that agencies publicly report, within specific timeframes, their progress and challenges in evaluating and complying with these guidelines. Existing AI systems under certain uses must be evaluated within two years or stopped, while new deployments must meet the guidelines before use.