Enable breadcrumbs token at /includes/pageheader.html.twig

Defense Needs Coherent AI Strategy, Say Government Watchdogs

Keeping up with the Chinese will require more than just funding and intent.

Credit: dotshock/Shutterstock

A comprehensive strategy with period reviews built around a goal-oriented plan are necessary for the U.S. Defense Department to prevail in the competition with China for artificial intelligence (AI), declares a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report. The Defense Department concurs with all seven of the recommendations issued by the GAO, which calls for the department to improve strategies, inventory processes and collaboration guidance.

The report, titled “Artificial Intelligence: DOD Should Improve Strategies, Inventory Process and Collaboration Guidance,” notes that the Defense Department believes that AI will transform warfare and that failure to adopt AI technology could hinder national security. Making the department’s AI strategies more comprehensive could entail including full descriptions of the resources needed for developing AI-enabled technologies, the report states. It also notes that the Defense Department has not yet issued guidance that clearly defines roles and responsibilities of participating components.

The report credits the department with some work on identifying and reporting on its AI activities, but limitations remain. Only by developing high-level plan or roadmap can the department capture all requirements and milestones in a way that provides a complete and accurate inventory of AI activities. The report also notes that the Defense Department is in the process of developing guidance and agreements to define roles and responsibilities of department components working with AI.

The first recommendation calls for the deputy secretary of defense to issue guidance to the chief digital and AI officer as well as the Joint AI Center (JAIC), the military services and relevant Defense Department organizations to generate characteristics of a comprehensive strategy in their own future AI strategies. This would include key governance practices outlined in the GAO AI accountability framework.

The second recommendation called for these same parties to establish documented procedures, including timelines, for the periodic review and implementation of the Defense Department AI strategy. The third recommendation specified the development of the high-level plan, which would capture all requirements, activities and milestones for the department’s AI portfolio.

The fourth recommendation urged that the secretary of defense direct the deputy secretary to issue guidance and defines outcomes and monitors accountability for AI activities while including key AI performance indicators. The fifth recommendation has the chief digital and AI officer and the JAIC director issue a high-level plan that includes all milestones. The sixth recommendation strives for establishing common terminology for AI related activities.

And, the seventh recommendation has the deputy secretary working with the chief digital and AI officer and the JAIC to finalize and issue guidance and agreements that define roles and responsibilities for the services and other defense organizations.

The GAO notes that department’s current nine AI-related strategies and plans do not include full descriptions of resources and investments nor the risk associated with adoption of AI-enabled technologies. Having a comprehensive strategy built on these recommendations could help ensure that accountability, the report states. With this guidance, AI participants could agree on responsibilities and decision making on AI efforts across the department, the report adds.