The Congressional Research Service has updated several of its reports on Navy ship and submarine programs:
Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress, December 17, 2015
Navy Littoral Combat Ship (LCS)/Frigate Program: Background and Issues for Congress, December 17, 2015
Navy Virginia (SSN-774) Class Attack Submarine Procurement: Background and Issues for Congress, December 17, 2015
Navy Ford (CVN-78) Class Aircraft Carrier Program: Background and Issues for Congress, December 17, 2015
Navy TAO(X) Oiler Shipbuilding Program: Background and Issues for Congress, December 17, 2015
Navy LX(R) Amphibious Ship Program: Background and Issues for Congress, December 17, 2015
Navy Ohio Replacement (SSBN[X]) Ballistic Missile Submarine Program: Background and Issues for Congress, December 17, 2015
Too often, affected patients, clinicians, and regulators cannot see how the system works, why a decision was made, or whether meaningful human oversight occurred.
Existing tools from other domains, such as existing robust public engagement processes in drug development, when applied to AI deployment can help strengthen public trust in these systems and enhance perceptions of their legitimacy and the decisions they produce.
With thoughtful policy action, it is still possible to build systems that are fair, transparent, and accountable, and to earn the public trust that will ultimately determine AI’s future. We hope policymakers are ready to act.
Procurement is not merely an administrative function—it is how AI enters government and the first line of defense for responsible AI in the public sector.