Incidents of fratricide in the U.S. war on terrorism increased in recent years, according to a new report (pdf) from the U.S. Army.
“Fratricide” — the unintended killing or injury of friendly forces — “is a harsh reality during combat operations,” the study states. “Over the course of 2004-2007, the number of fratricide incidents increased, and experts speculate this is due to the high operational tempo and the reliance on technology during the current war.”
According to official data, “there were 55 U.S. Army fratricide incidents from 11 September 2001 to 30 March 2008. Forty of these were Class A accidents” — involving damage costs of $2 million or more and/or destruction of an Army aircraft, missile or spacecraft and/or fatality or permanent total disability — “resulting in the deaths of 30 U.S. Army personnel.”
Human error is a primary causal factor in many fratricide incidents, the study indicated, and “therefore, human error must be considered in the design and development of fratricide countermeasures, including both technical and human-centric solutions… Improved supervision and leadership may have the greatest potential to reduce U.S. fratricide incidents.”
See “An Analysis of U.S. Army Fratricide Incidents during the Global War on Terror (11 September 2001 to 31 March 2008)” by Catherine M. Webb and Kate J. Hewett, U.S. Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory, March 2010.
As new waves of AI technologies continue to enter the public sector, touching a breadth of services critical to the welfare of the American people, this center of excellence will help maintain high standards for responsible public sector AI for decades to come.
The Federation of American Scientists supports the Critical Materials Future Act and the Unearth Innovation Act.
By creating a reliable, user-friendly framework for surfacing provenance, NIST would empower readers to better discern the trustworthiness of the text they encounter, thereby helping to counteract the risks posed by deceptive AI-generated content.
By investing in the mechanisms that connect learning ecosystems, policymakers can build “neighborhoods” of learning that prepare students for citizenship, work, and life.