Artificial intelligence and UK national security: Policy considerations

RUSI was commissioned by GCHQ to conduct an independent research study into the use of artificial intelligence (AI) for national security purposes. The aim of this project is to establish an independent evidence base to inform future policy development regarding national security uses of AI. The findings are based on in-depth consultation with stakeholders from across the UK national security community, law enforcement agencies, private sector companies, academic and legal experts, and civil society representatives. This was complemented by a targeted review of existing literature on the topic of AI and national security. The research has found that AI offers numerous opportunities for the UK national security community to improve efficiency and effectiveness of existing processes. AI methods can rapidly derive insights from large, disparate datasets and identify connections that would otherwise go unnoticed by human operators. However, in the context of national security and the powers given to UK intelligence agencies, use of AI could give rise to additional privacy and human rights considerations which would need to be assessed within the existing legal and regulatory framework. For this reason, enhanced policy and guidance is needed to ensure the privacy and human rights implications of national security uses of AI are reviewed on an ongoing basis as new analysis methods are applied to data

Bounded Rationality and Heuristics in Humans and in Artificial Cognitive Systems

In this paper I will present an analysis of the impact that the notion of “bounded rationality”, introduced by Herbert Simon in his book “Administrative Behavior”, produced in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI). In particular, by focusing on the field of Automated Decision Making (ADM), I will show how the introduction of the cognitive dimension into the study of choice of a rational (natural) agent, indirectly determined - in the AI field - the development of a line of research aiming at the realisation of artificial systems whose decisions are based on the adoption of powerful shortcut strategies (known as heuristics) based on “satisficing” - i.e. non optimal - solutions to problem solving. I will show how the “heuristic approach” to problem solving allowed, in AI, to face problems of combinatorial complexity in real-life situations and still represents an important strategy for the design and implementation of intelligent systems

Novel Artificial Human Optimization Field Algorithms - The Beginning

New Artificial Human Optimization (AHO) Field Algorithms can be created from scratch or by adding the concept of Artificial Humans into other existing Optimization Algorithms. Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) has been very popular for solving complex optimization problems due to its simplicity. In this work, new Artificial Human Optimization Field Algorithms are created by modifying existing PSO algorithms with AHO Field Concepts. These Hybrid PSO Algorithms comes under PSO Field as well as AHO Field. There are Hybrid PSO research articles based on Human Behavior, Human Cognition and Human Thinking etc. But there are no Hybrid PSO articles which based on concepts like Human Disease, Human Kindness and Human Relaxation. This paper proposes new AHO Field algorithms based on these research gaps. Some existing Hybrid PSO algorithms are given a new name in this work so that it will be easy for future AHO researchers to find these novel Artificial Human Optimization Field Algorithms. A total of 6 Artificial Human Optimization Field algorithms titled "Human Safety Particle Swarm Optimization (HuSaPSO)", "Human Kindness Particle Swarm Optimization (HKPSO)", "Human Relaxation Particle Swarm Optimization (HRPSO)", "Multiple Strategy Human Particle Swarm Optimization (MSHPSO)", "Human Thinking Particle Swarm Optimization (HTPSO)" and "Human Disease Particle Swarm Optimization (HDPSO)" are tested by applying these novel algorithms on Ackley, Beale, Bohachevsky, Booth and Three-Hump Camel Benchmark Functions. Results obtained are compared with PSO algorithm.Comment: 25 pages, 41 figure