This page is still being polished. If you have thoughts, please share them via the feedback form.
Data on this page is preliminary and may change. Please do not share or cite these figures publicly.
Non-binding diplomatic coordination, soft law agreements, and intergovernmental cooperation without treaty-level enforcement.
Also in Voluntary & Cooperative
We should actively make efforts to conduct cooperation with countries, support the building of an international institution on AI governance within the United Nations framework to coordinate major issues related to AI development, safety, security, and governance. We should advance cooperation on AI safety governance under multilateral mechanisms such as APEC, G20 and BRICS, and strengthen cooperation with Belt and Road partner countries and Global South countries. Efforts should be made to study the matters relating to the construction of an AI safety governance alliance to increase the representation and voice of developing countries in global AI governance. AI enterprises and institutions should be encouraged to engage in international exchanges and cooperation, share their best practices, jointly develop international standards of AI safety.
Reasoning
Establishes diplomatic coordination and international institution for multi-national AI governance framework.
Technological measures to address risks
Responding to the above risks, AI developers, service providers, and system users should prevent risks by taking technological measures in the fields of training data, computing infrastructures, models and algorithms, product services, and application scenarios.
1 AI SystemTechnological measures to address risks > Addressing AI’s inherent safety risks
99 OtherTechnological measures to address risks > Addressing safety risks in AI applications
99 OtherComprehensive governance measures
2.1 Oversight & AccountabilityComprehensive governance measures > Implement a tiered and category-based management for AI application
We should classify and grade AI systems based on their features, functions, and application scenarios, and set up a testing and assessment system based on AI risk levels. We should bolster enduse management of AI, and impose requirements on the adoption of AI technologies by specific users and in specific scenarios, thereby preventing AI system abuse. We should register AI systems whose computing and reasoning capacities have reached a certain threshold or those are applied in specific industries and sectors, and demand that such systems possess the safety protection capacity throughout the life cycle including design, R&D, testing, deployment, utilization, and maintenance.
3.1.4 Compliance RequirementsComprehensive governance measures > Develop a traceability management system for AI services
We should use digital certificates to label the AI systems serving the public. We should formulate and introduce standards and regulations on AI output labeling, and clarify requirements for explicit and implicit labels throughout key stages including creation sources, transmission paths, and distribution channels, with a view to enable users to identify and judge information sources and credibility.
3.1.4 Compliance RequirementsAI Safety Governance Framework
National Technical Committee 260 on Cybersecurity of SAC (2024)
Artificial Intelligence (AI), a new area of human development, presents significant opportunities to the world while posing various risks and challenges. Upholding a people-centered approach and adhering to the principle of developing AI for good, this framework has been formulated to implement the Global AI Governance Initiative and promote consensus and coordinated efforts on AI safety governance among governments, international organizations, companies, research institutes, civil organizations, and individuals, aiming to effectively prevent and defuse AI safety risks.
Other (outside lifecycle)
Outside the standard AI system lifecycle
Governance Actor
Regulator, standards body, or oversight entity shaping AI policy
Govern
Policies, processes, and accountability structures for AI risk management
Primary
6.5 Governance failure