Recent government directives, international conferences, and media headlines reflect growing concern that artificial intelligence could exacerbate biological threats. When it comes to biorisk, AI tools are cited as enablers that lower information barriers, enhance novel biothreat design, or otherwise increase a malicious actor’s capabilities. In this explainer, CSET Biorisk Research Fellow Steph Batalis summarizes the state of the biorisk landscape with and without AI.

The recent Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence will have major implications for biotechnology. The EO demonstrates that the White House considers biorisk a major concern for AI safety and security. In this blog post CSET’s bio experts explain the bio-relevant takeaways of the executive order, add some additional context, and note their remaining questions about its implementation.

There’s a lot to digest in the October 30 White House’s AI Executive Order. Our tracker is a useful starting point to identify key provisions and monitor the government’s progress against specific milestones, but grappling with the substance is an entirely different matter. This blog post, focusing on Section 4 of the EO (“Developing Guidelines, Standards, and Best Practices for AI Safety and Security”), is the first in a series that summarizes interesting provisions, shares some of our initial reactions, and highlights some of CSET’s research that may help the USG tackle the EO.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is one of the world’s most pressing global health threats. Basic research is the first step towards identifying solutions. This brief examines the AMR research landscape since 2000, finding that the amount of research is increasing and that the U.S. is a leading publisher, but also that novel solutions like phages and synthetic antimicrobial production are a small portion of that research.

In an op-ed published in Foreign Policy, CSET’s Steph Batalis discusses the potential misuse of artificial intelligence chatbots in providing instructions for the construction of biological weapons.

CSET submitted the following comment in response to a Request for Information (RFI) from the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy about potential changes to the Policies for Federal and Institutional Oversight of Life Sciences Dual Use Research of Concern (DURC) and Recommended Policy Guidance for Departmental Development of Review Mechanisms for Potential Pandemic Pathogen Care and Oversight (P3CO).

In their op-ed featured in Think Global Health, CSET's Steph Batalis and Caroline Schuerger provide expert analysis on the ongoing debate in the United States regarding gain-of-function (GOF) research.

In a Washington Post article that delves into China's extensive efforts to collect genetic data from around the world, using innovative technology, CSET's Anna Puglisi provided her expert insights.

CSET's Anna Puglisi was featured in a Nature article along with a report she co-authored. The article discusses the challenges faced by US policymakers in regulating research involving potentially harmful pathogens. The focal point of the discussion is the CSET report titled “Understanding the Global Gain-of-Function Research Landscape.”

Gain- and loss-of-function research have contributed to breakthroughs in vaccine development, genetic research, and gene therapy. At the same time, a subset of gain- and loss-of-function studies involve high-risk, highly virulent pathogens that could spread widely among humans if deliberately or unintentionally released. In this report, we map the gain- and loss-of-function global research landscape using a quantitative approach that combines machine learning with subject-matter expert review.