Securing U.S. Leadership in Emerging Compute Technologies (U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation)

Hearing	Securing U.S. Leadership in Emerging Compute Technologies
Committee	U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Date	September 29, 2022

 

Hearing Takeaways:

• Innovative Technologies: The hearing mainly focused on the U.S.’s efforts to promote innovative technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI), high performance computing (HPC), quantum information science (QIS), blockchains, and distributed ledger technology (DLT). Committee Members and the hearing’s witnesses expressed interest in securing the U.S.’s leadership in these technologies for economic competitiveness and national security reasons.
  • AI: Committee Members and Mr. Clark discussed the importance of the U.S. being a leader in AI innovation and noted how AI could support numerous applications, including in health care and autonomous vehicles (AVs). Mr. Clark warned that China was working diligently to overtake the U.S. as the global leader in AI. He called on the U.S. to increase its AI experimental infrastructure and commented that the National AI Research Resource (NAIRR) could support academic research into AI. Committee Democrats and Mr. Clark also expressed interest in ensuring that AI systems were transparent and free from bias to the greatest extent possible.
  • HPC and QIS: Committee Members, Dr. Allbritton, Mr. Breckenridge, and Dr. Sutor expressed interest in HPC and QIS innovation and noted how these technologies could support numerous applications, including AI, AVs, cybersecurity, data science, and weather modeling. They called for more investments in these technologies and the materials needed to support these technologies, including lasers and photonic integrated circuits (PICs). They also stated that these investments would make these technologies more accessible to researchers and students, which would further spur innovation. Mr. Breckenridge warned that China was increasing its share of the world’s fastest computers and that their computing capabilities now likely rivaled those of the U.S.
  • Blockchains and DLT: Mr. Lupien remarked that the U.S. should strive to be a global leader in blockchain technology and DLT. He described blockchains as a new type of database that allow for multiple people to view the same information simultaneously and stated that blockchains provide trust that the information is valid. He remarked that the blockchain industry was currently receiving mixed signals from regulators and called for the establishment of a comprehensive regulatory framework for digital assets technology. He recommended that the Committee consider opportunities for the U.S. to partner with research universities on exploring ways that digital assets could bring about U.S. financial and business leadership and public benefits. He also remarked that digital assets would play a key role in driving many new technologies, including metaverse technologies. He elaborated that digital assets would likely serve as the payments systems and currencies for metaverses.
• Implementation of the CHIPS and Science Act: The hearing also focused largely on the implementation of the recently enacted CHIPS and Science Act. This law broadly provides federal funding for semiconductor research production, as well as federal support for other types of scientific research.
  • Geographical Diversity Provisions: Committee Republicans, Mr. Breckenridge, Mr. Lupien, and Dr. Jones highlighted how the CHIPS and Science Act guaranteed that Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) states would receive 20 percent of all U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) research and development (R&D) funding. They stated that this provision would help to ensure that innovation was more equitably distributed throughout the U.S.
  • Appropriations for the CHIPS and Science Act: Committee Members expressed interest in ensuring that the Congressional Appropriations Committees would fully fund the law’s provisions. They expressed particular interest in ensuring that the law’s provision’s related to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and regional technology hubs were fully funded.
• Workforce Concerns: Committee Members and the hearing’s witnesses expressed particular interest in ensuring that the U.S. possessed a sufficient workforce to support its development and implementation of innovative technologies. Full Committee Chairman Maria Cantwell (D-WA) noted how the CHIPS and Science Act had authorized $13 billion for STEM education. She indicated that this money provided funds for nearly 40,000 scholarships, fellowships, and traineeships.
  • Importance of Education and Apprenticeship Programs: Committee Members, Dr. Allbritton, Dr. Sutor, Mr. Lupien, and Dr. Jones all expressed interest in expanding education and apprenticeship opportunities to train Americans for innovative technology fields. They emphasized that these new jobs would not all require doctorate degrees or even four-year traditional degrees. Dr. Allbritton and Mr. Lupien empathized the importance of starting these educational efforts at an early level (such as at the high school or elementary school levels). Dr. Jones also noted how generational and socioeconomic barriers often prevented prospective students from pursuing STEM educations. He mentioned how the University of Southern Mississippi was working to address these barriers through incorporating industry certifications as milestones in their computer science degree programs. He commented that this modification would improve opportunities for students that might not be able to pursue their four-year degrees all at once.
  • Importance of Immigration: Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO) and the hearing’s witnesses remarked that it was important to enable talent to immigrate to the U.S. to support the U.S.’s development of emerging technologies. Dr. Allbritton stated that facilitating immigration to the U.S. for talented researchers would provide the U.S. with a technological advantage over other countries, which would make the U.S. wealthier, more diverse, and more productive.
  • Importance of Workforce Diversity: Committee Democrats, Dr. Allbritton, Mr. Lupien, Mr. Clark, and Dr. Jones expressed interest in ensuring that the U.S.’s STEM workforce was more diverse and would include more women and underrepresented minorities. Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and Mr. Lupien expressed particular interest in education programs that would encourage underrepresented groups to pursue STEM careers.
• Other Policy Issues: Committee Members and the hearing’s witnesses expressed interest in other policy issues related to innovative technology.
  • Enabling Innovative Companies to Remain Financially Viable as They Commercialized their Products and Services: Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and Dr. Sutor noted how many innovative companies often struggled to remain financially viable as they worked to commercialize their products and services. Dr. Sutor stated that the U.S. needed to provide longer-term investments to keep innovative startup companies viable as they worked to commercialize their products and services.
  • Cybersecurity Concerns: Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) raised concerns that AI could pose certain cybersecurity risks and commented that AI could increase the speed and agility of the U.S.’s adversaries. He also highlighted how the Biden administration had recently issued a national security memorandum focused on easing the migration of critical infrastructure computer systems toward quantum resistant cryptography. Dr. Sutor noted how it could take a bank up to ten years to move to a new cryptographic protocol. He remarked that it was therefore important for the U.S. to proactively upgrade its encryption systems in anticipation of future capabilities. He also stated that the U.S. needed to consider export controls for areas that might seek to leverage quantum computing to engage in cyberattacks against U.S. entities.
  • Semiconductor Shortages: Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) raised concerns over the U.S.’s current semiconductor shortages and supply chain challenges, which could adversely impact the technology sector. Dr. Sutor stated that any problems with classical computing components (such as semiconductors) would lead to problems with quantum computing. He noted however that new technologies (including PICs and lasers) could help to address these issues.

Hearing Witnesses:

1. Dr. Nancy Allbritton, Frank and Julie Jungers Dean College of Engineering Dean, University of Washington
2. Mr. Jack Clark, co-Founder, Anthropic
3. Mr. William B. (Trey) Breckenridge III, Director of High Performance Computing, High Performance Computing Collaboratory (HPC2), Mississippi State University
4. Mr. Steve Lupien, Director of Center for Blockchain and Digital Initiatives, University of Wyoming, College of Business
5. Dr. Bob Sutor, Vice President, Corporate Development, ColdQuanta
6. Dr. Henry Jones, Director of the Research Development and Scientific Entrepreneurship, The University of Southern Mississippi

Member Opening Statements:

Full Committee Chairman Maria Cantwell (D-WA):

• She noted how President Biden had signed the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act into law in August 2022 and remarked that the hearing would focus on building the U.S.’s technological workforce for leading edge and computational disciplines.
• She stated that U.S. leadership in computation would grow the economy, create new jobs, and keep the U.S. safe.
  • She commented that the CHIPS and Science Act was focused on bolstering the U.S.’s computing abilities for these reasons.
• She discussed how the CHIPS and Science Act had invested more than $50 billion into semiconductor chip manufacturing.
  • She highlighted how this investment had led to manufacturing groundbreakings and announcements for Ohio, Idaho, North Carolina, and Washington.
• She also noted how the CHIPS and Science Act had emphasized research and workforce development in ten key technology areas.
  • She highlighted how four of these areas dealt with computation: AI, semiconductors, QIS, and DLT.
• She raised concerns over the U.S.’s inability to fill the increasing number of jobs within the computation space and called this situation a “crisis.”
• She noted how the CHIPS and Science Act had authorized $13 billion for STEM education and indicated that this money provided funds for nearly 40,000 scholarships, fellowships, and traineeships.
• She then discussed how AI supported many technological innovations and stated that humans were often necessary to make AI-supported applications work.
  • She called it important for the U.S. to train AI-literate workers and referenced a Georgetown University study that found that the U.S. would add 1 million AI jobs between 2019 and 2029.
• She also noted how universities were turning away prospective DLT students because they could not find enough teachers to meet this demand.
• She remarked that the country that combines the power of quantum computing with AI could obtain an “insurmountable” leadership position in technology and lamented how the U.S. faced a shortage of quantum computing talent.
  • She noted how fewer than 5 percent of U.S. PhD candidate in relevant fields focused on quantum science.
• She lastly discussed how her state of Washington was a national leader in AI research, DLT, and quantum science.

Full Committee Ranking Member Roger Wicker (R-MS):

• He noted how the recently enacted CHIPS and Science Act provided “critical” investments and policy tools to advance U.S. innovation in key technologies.
  • He indicated that these key technologies included quantum computing, AI, and blockchain.
• He stated that the emergence of these key technologies posed important questions for policymakers regarding security, privacy, and other societal issues.
• He expressed particular interest in ensuring that innovation occurred throughout the U.S. (rather than in a few select regions).
  • He applauded the CHIPS and Science Act’s provisions that sought to advance this objective.
• He also expressed interest in learning about where the U.S. ranks globally in terms of emerging computing technologies (particularly in relation to China).
  • He described China and other countries as “increasingly” dominant” in technology innovation and stated that this dominance posed threats to the U.S. economy and national security.
• He remarked that the recently enacted CHIPS and Science Act sought to bolster the U.S.’s competitiveness and mentioned how the CHIPS and Science Act established a new Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships position at the NSF to support this goal.
  • He explained how this position would support the translation of basic research into technology development for commercial use.
• He reiterated the importance of geographical diversity in U.S. innovation and highlighted how the CHIPS and Science Act worked to promote this diversity.
  • He noted how the law guaranteed that EPSCoR states would receive 20 percent of all NSF R&D funding.
  • He highlighted how EPSCoR states currently received just 13 percent of this NSF research funding.

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO):

• He remarked that the recently passed CHIPS and Science Act would provide a “massive investment in the country’s future” and mentioned how he had served as a conferee during the legislation’s consideration.
  • He stated that technology R&D supported economic growth, public health, and national defense.
• He emphasized the importance of having the U.S. grow and diversify its skilled workforce (which would include providing career opportunities for people without traditional four-year college degrees) and having the U.S. support manufacturing and innovation throughout the entire country (rather than in just certain regions).
• He applauded the U.S. Senate for its recent confirmation of Dr. Arati Prabhakar to serve as the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).
  • He commented that Director Prabhakar would play a key role in implementing the CHIPS and Science Act.
• He noted how the hearing would focus on three key areas: AI, QIS, and DLT.
• He stated that AI could help to automate complex processes and improve the efficiency of every sector of the U.S. economy.
  • He commented that the U.S. must ensure that AI systems were transparent and free from bias to the greatest extent possible.
• He also discussed how QIS would enable the U.S. to run simulations with “staggering” speed and mentioned how significant QIS research was occurring within his state of Colorado.
• He lastly highlighted how DLT could improve the security of financial transactions and support innovations in data privacy.

Witness Opening Statements:

Dr. Nancy Allbritton (Frank and Julie Jungers Dean College of Engineering, University of Washington):

• She discussed how University of Washington faculty played key leadership roles in multi-institution efforts to advance AI, machine learning, and data science.
  • She indicated that this leadership was in addition to their efforts to train the next generation of workers and innovators.
• She applauded Congress for its recent passage of the CHIPS and Science Act and contended that a sustained federal investment in federal technology programs was “essential” for the U.S. to maintain its international leadership.
• She also called it important for the U.S. to leverage collaborative opportunities between government, academia, and industry and to build a diverse workforce.
• She indicated that her opening statements would focus on the U.S.’s investments in QIS and highlighted how QIS could support the development of more accurate hurricane and weather prediction models.
  • She commented that these QIS-based hurricane and weather prediction models could help to save lives and reduce property damage.
• She remarked that advances in QIS could provide “major” breakthroughs in communications, computing, and simulation and contended that the U.S. must accelerate federal investments in QIS to ensure its international competitiveness.
• She discussed how growing numbers of universities around the world (including the University of Washington) have established QIS programs and called the competition for QIS students, researchers, faculty, and funding “intense.”
  • She also mentioned how industry was actively working to hire QIS professionals, which was contributing to the competition for QIS talent.
• She remarked that the U.S. was the best-positioned country to become the global leader in QIS and attributed this advantage to the U.S.’s existing partnerships between academia, government, and industry.
• She stated that the University of Washington’s lack of critical QIS capabilities hampered its impact in the QIS space.
  • She specifically expressed concerns over the large costs associated with implementing and maintaining these capabilities.
• She also highlighted how the U.S.’s shortage of equipped and diverse QIS talent was undermining the QIS industry’s growth.
  • She stated that the competition for skilled QIS workers was intensifying and called this growing demand unsustainable.
• She testified that student demand for STEM coursework at the University of Washington far exceeded the capacity of most of the university’s programs.
  • She indicated that this dynamic forced the university to turn away qualified students at a time when the U.S. demands a skilled workforce.
• She called on Congress to sustain and increase federal technology R&D funding, particularly for federal science research agencies.
• She also called on Congress to increase federal investments in workforce development and education, accessible quantum testbeds and quantum cloud computing, high-risk engineering and science research, and more fundamental QIS research.

Mr. Jack Clark (Anthropic):

• He thanked the Committee for its work to pass the CHIPS and Science Act and commented that the Committee’s work was supporting the U.S.’s continued leadership in developing transformative technologies, such as AI.
• He remarked that the U.S. should fully implement the CHIPS and Science Act and make further investments in the measurement and monitoring of both domestic and foreign AI developments.
  • He also called for the U.S. to build experimental infrastructure for the development and testing of AI systems for academic and government users.
• He stated that the U.S. must prioritize the creation of testbeds for AI across the U.S. and commented that these testbeds can be used to train a new diverse workforce in the art of assessing and deploying AI systems.
• He remarked that the U.S. currently enjoyed an “enviable” position in AI and highlighted how the U.S. possessed a strong academic base, a thriving commercial sector, and a government interested in supporting the AI industry.
• He discussed how there now existed numerous AI applications and mentioned how these applications could improve coding, sustainable development outcomes, and translation capabilities.
  • He further highlighted how foundation models were a new class of AI models that could be used to perform multiple tasks.
• He remarked however that there existed significant international competition within the AI space and noted how China rivaled the U.S. in terms of AI R&D.
  • He mentioned how China had published more AI research papers and filed more AI patents than the U.S. in 2021.
  • He noted that while the U.S. remained the global leader in terms of accepted AI research papers and the number of citations received by its AI research papers, he warned that China was catching up to the U.S. on these two items.
• He also highlighted how China had proven capable of “significant feats” of AI engineering and research.
  • He mentioned how Chinese scientists have won image recognition challenges that were previously dominated by U.S. companies.
  • He also mentioned how Chinese companies (such as Huawei) were the first entities to publicly replicate frontier research published by U.S. companies.
• He stated that the testing and evaluation of AI systems was “fundamental” to realizing commercial applications for these systems and for identifying any safety issues.
• He called it important for Congress to ensure that the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was able to stand up AI testbeds throughout the U.S.
  • He commented that these testbeds would enable local communities to “vigorously” test and deploy AI systems.
• He lastly remarked that the U.S. needed better experimental infrastructure for AI and expressed support for NAIRR.

Mr. William B. (Trey) Breckenridge III (High Performance Computing Collaboratory, Mississippi State University):

• He remarked that the U.S.’s research investments had fallen “woefully” behind the research investments made by the U.S.’s adversaries in areas that were critical to U.S. national security.
• He discussed how HPC capacity provided support for research in AI, AVs, cybersecurity, data science, and weather modeling and highlighted how Mississippi State University maintained world-class HPC capabilities.
  • He attributed Mississippi State University’s HPC capabilities to the university’s partnerships with federal agencies, including the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the NSF, the U.S. Agricultural Research Service (ARS), and the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD).
• He then noted how the U.S. currently had only 23 percent of the world’s 500 fastest computers while China currently possessed over 45 percent of these computers.
  • He indicated that the U.S. had previously possessed more than 50 percent of world’s fastest computers in 2012 while China had only possessed less than 14 percent of these computers in 2012.
• He also discussed how China had “significantly” increased its HPC funding to match or exceed the U.S.’s HPC capacity at the very high end.
  • He noted that while the fastest publicly known HPC system was located within the U.S., he indicated that many experts were confident that China had secretly built two HPC systems that rival the performance of the U.S.’s fastest HPC system.
• He highlighted how AI and blockchain technologies relied heavily upon HPC and predicted that the next major advance in computing would involve quantum technology.
• He remarked that while quantum technology had the potential to solve previously unsolvable and complex problems, he stated that this technology also presented many problems that must be overcome with “significant” investments.
  • He noted how quantum technology would place much of the U.S.’s current public key encryption at risk.
  • He also asserted that the U.S. faced challenges related to the creation and training of a knowledgeable quantum technology workforce.
• He stated that the recent passage of the CHIPS and Science Act would help the U.S. to match the investments being made in critical technology areas by foreign countries.
  • He commented that the current semiconductor chip shortage had highlighted the dangers associated with the U.S.’s dependence on foreign technologies.
  • He also asserted that there existed “strong evidence” that China’s investments in QIS and AI were outpacing the U.S.’s investments in these areas.
• He lastly applauded the CHIPS and Science Act’s EPSCoR funding provisions and contended that these provisions would “vastly expand” the talent base in critical technology fields.
  • He noted how Mississippi State University was an EPSCoR institution and stated that the university had played a key role in advancing HPC.

Mr. Steve Lupien (Center for Blockchain and Digital Initiatives, University of Wyoming):

• He described blockchains as a new type of database that allow for multiple people to view the same information simultaneously and provide trust that the information is valid.
  • He noted how blockchains make data unique and explained that data on blockchains is immutable and encrypted and enables trust to be written into code.
• He discussed how his state of Wyoming had enacted several blockchain policies in recent years, including token taxonomy legislation that provided legal definitions for digital assets, policies that map digital assets to Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) law, the establishment of a financial technology (FinTech) regulatory sandbox, and Special Purpose Depository Institution (SPDI) legislation that creates regulated banks for both U.S. dollar deposits and digital assets.
• He asserted that digital assets should be able to flourish under “appropriate” regulatory guardrails while providing latitude for experimentation, development, and growth.
  • He commented that digital assets did not constitute a threat to the U.S.’s existing financial and business systems and contended that these assets should instead be viewed as beneficial to the U.S.’s international competitiveness.
• He stated that the blockchain industry was currently receiving mixed signals from regulators and called for the establishment of a comprehensive regulatory framework for digital assets technology.
• He remarked that digital assets were broader than just cryptocurrencies and noted how digital assets were being used for supply chain tracking systems, frictionless and speedy payments systems, smart contracts, and the tokenization of physical assets through non-fungible tokens (NFTs).
  • He also highlighted how NFTs allowed for the tokenization of intellectual property (IP) and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) tokens.
• He recommended that the Committee consider opportunities for the U.S. to partner with research universities on exploring ways that digital assets could bring about U.S. financial and business leadership and public benefits.
  • He specifically called on the Committee to consider the role that rural universities could play in conducting digital assets research.
  • He mentioned how the University of Wyoming was the first Division I university to offer a degree program in blockchain.
  • He further mentioned how the University of Wyoming operates both an educational Bitcoin mining lab and a proof of stake staking pool.
• He also expressed support for efforts to foster digital literacy and mentioned how the Center for Blockchain and Digital Initiatives had received funding to develop educational programs for Wyoming’s high schools and community colleges.
  • He explained that these programs sought to introduce students to STEM and blockchain opportunities.
  • He also highlighted how these programs sought to encourage more women to pursue STEM and blockchain opportunities and noted how women were currently underrepresented in the STEM and blockchain workforce.
• He called on the Committee to consider ways to deploy these types of educational programs nationwide.
• He lastly mentioned how the U.S. Department of Commerce had recently published their Responsible Advancement of U.S. Competitiveness in Digital Assets report and expressed support for the report’s policy recommendations.
  • He noted that these recommendations would address regulatory gaps, foster “meaningful” public-private engagement on digital asset issues, and provide sustained leadership and investment in technological R&D.

Dr. Bob Sutor (ColdQuanta):

• He remarked that quantum computing and technology would profoundly change U.S. life and asserted that this technology would have significant economic and national security implications.
• He stated that both Congress and the Executive Branch had taken “bold and important” steps to address the U.S.’s quantum computing capabilities through the CHIPS and Science Act and the National Quantum Initiative program.
  • He called on the U.S. to accelerate the development of quantum computing technology, build a robust quantum computing domestic supply chain, and develop a quantum computing workforce.
• He discussed how quantum computers remained early in their development stage and noted how the number of qubits in currently known quantum computers ranged from the single digits to slightly more than 100.
  • He commented that practical quantum computers would require hundreds of thousands or even millions of qubits.
• He highlighted how quantum computing could support the development of new materials and substances, including medicines, therapeutics, batteries, and alloys.
• He stated that the computers had historically become smaller and more powerful over time and noted how edge computing worked with data close to where it is created or used.
  • He commented that the U.S. might eventually deploy quantum computers to cellular towers, factories, transportation vehicles, and satellites.
• He remarked that the U.S. must invest in scaling up the power of quantum systems while also scaling down the size and costs of these systems for use at the edge.
  • He asserted that a data center-only strategy would leave the U.S. vulnerable to not having the necessary computing resources in desired locations.
• He then discussed how quantum technology had many additional applications beyond computing and noted that quantum inertial sensors and quantum atomic clocks could provide positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) capabilities.
  • He commented that these sensors would have commercial, defense, and intelligence benefits.
  • He also mentioned how quantum gravity sensors could assist in finding new energy and mining resources and in detecting underground facilities not apparent from visual examination.
• He remarked that quantum systems would require significant investment, scientific progress, engineering innovation, education, and skills development.
  • He asserted that the U.S. must proactively work to address these requirements.
• He called on the U.S. to secure its quantum supply chain for necessary enabling components, including lasers and PICs.
• He also discussed how the U.S. would require a quantum workforce to successfully pursue quantum technologies and indicated that this workforce would need to involve people without doctorate degrees.
  • He noted that these non-doctorate degree holding workers will include trained manufacturing and information technology (IT) workers, as well as software and hardware engineers.
• He also stated that the U.S. must strengthen its education in computer science, physics, mathematics, and engineering to ensure a robust quantum workforce.
• He then asserted that there currently was a shortage of federal assistance to help quantum companies to transition their promising cutting-edge technologies now under development to prototypes, production, scale, and academia.
  • He called on the U.S. to strengthen and accelerate the collaboration between academia, government, and industry to obtain practical and pervasive quantum technologies sooner.
• He stated that quantum companies required better procedural and program mechanisms to navigate the stage of development involving scattered investment without integration into deployed systems of record.
  • He noted how this stage was often referred to as the “valley of death.”
• He further remarked that the U.S. needed to better track, manage, and coordinate the federal government’s many individual quantum R&D projects.

Dr. Henry Jones (The University of Southern Mississippi):

• He remarked that the U.S. government had faced challenges in keeping pace with technological innovations and stated that the people and processes of industry were designed for competition.
  • He elaborated that these people and processes needed to achieve product-market fit and often needed to perform quick iterations that were “intensely” customer driven.
• He discussed how several federal agencies, including the NSF, the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), the DoD, the U.S. Department of Energy, and NOAA, maintained programs that involved collaboration between industry and academia.
• He thanked the Committee for creating the new NSF Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships position and contended that this position would accelerate the impact of these collaborative programs.
  • He commented that unexpected innovations often came from unconventional connections and emphasized the importance of sharing ideas across different disciplines.
• He remarked that EPSCoR supported innovation through bringing together universities and their individual innovators and exposing them to interdisciplinary research.
• He thanked Full Committee Ranking Member Roger Wicker (R-MS) for inserting a provision into the CHIPS and Science Act that stipulated that EPSCoR states would receive an increase in NSF funding.
  • He asserted that this provision was necessary for promoting continued geographic and economic diversity.
• He also applauded the Committee for its work to establish regional technology hubs as part of the CHIPS and Science Act and stated that these hubs would ensure that innovation occurred in more geographically diverse areas.
  • He highlighted how the CHIPS and Science Act would locate one-third of the 18 new regional technology hubs in EPSCoR states.
• He recommended that special consideration be given to the alignment of capital pipelines when establishing the CHIPS and Science Act’s regional technology hubs.
  • He commented that the failure to provide this consideration could lead innovative technology companies in EPSCoR states to leave for more traditional technology hubs.
• He remarked that diversity of all types was imperative for the technology industry and stated that a lack of diversity would result in groupthink and its associated problems.
• He also raised concerns that the U.S. did not have enough trained citizens to fill technology jobs and called for bolstering the U.S.’s educational pipeline.
• He noted how generational and socioeconomic barriers often prevented prospective students from pursuing STEM educations.
  • He mentioned how the University of Southern Mississippi was working to address these barriers through incorporating industry certifications as milestones in their computer science degree programs.
  • He commented that this modification would improve opportunities for students that might not be able to pursue their four-year degrees all at once.

Congressional Question Period:

Full Committee Chairman Maria Cantwell (D-WA):

• Chairman Cantwell remarked that Congress should fully fund the $13 billion for STEM education efforts that was authorized under the CHIPS and Science Act. She asked Dr. Allbritton to explain why STEM education funding was important. She also asked Dr. Allbritton to discuss the testbeds and infrastructure needed by the University of Washington to perform translational science.
  • Dr. Allbritton remarked that it was important for the U.S. to promote science and engineering as a viable career path for both young people and their parents. She stated that there should be funding to ensure that science and engineering students would be well-positioned to succeed in their pursuits of degrees. She also stated that science and engineering student interactions with industry would be beneficial.
• Chairman Cantwell interjected to ask Dr. Allbritton to indicate whether the failure of Congressional Appropriations Committees to fund the STEM education efforts authorized under the CHIPS and Science Act would result in the law not achieving its intended impact.
  • Dr. Allbritton answered affirmatively. She remarked that other countries were outcompeting the U.S. in terms of STEM education. She also asserted that the U.S. had too few students going into STEM fields. She testified that Washington state lacked sufficient capacity to provide STEM educational opportunities to all the students that wanted to pursue such opportunities. She concluded that the U.S. required all the support it could get to advance its international competitiveness in STEM fields.
• Chairman Cantwell then asked Dr. Allbritton to address why the U.S. needed to establish more testlabs for supporting translational science.
  • Dr. Allbritton remarked that the University of Washington wanted to establish open and accessible regional technology hubs. She noted how quantum technology was very expensive and environmentally sensitive. She stated that making quantum technology available to University of Washington students would be beneficial for educational and workforce development purposes. She added that regional technology hubs could play a key role in reeducating workers about quantum technology. She also stated that testbeds with state-of-the-art characterization tools would enable researchers to conduct QIS research without needing to first obtain large grants.
• Chairman Cantwell stated that the Committee would need to convince the Congressional Appropriations Committees to fund STEM education efforts and testbeds.

Full Committee Ranking Member Roger Wicker (R-MS):

• Ranking Member Wicker asked Mr. Breckenridge to discuss how Mississippi State University was a national leader in HPC. He also asked Mr. Breckenridge to address whether Congress should eventually make permanent the increase in NSF funding for EPSCoR states under the CHIPS and Science Act.
  • Mr. Breckenridge discussed how Mississippi State University had been studying and pioneering HPC and its associated technologies since the 1980s. He indicated that these efforts had involved partnerships with several federal agencies. He also stated that Mississippi State University had excelled in the use of HPC and commented that the university was not solely focused on building these machines. He remarked that Mississippi State University was a leader in grid generation and mentioned how the university was doing significant research related to AVs, weather modeling, and cybersecurity.
• Ranking Member Wicker highlighted how the CHIPS and Science Act’s provision requiring that EPSCoR states receive 20 percent of all NSF funding would sunset in 2029. He asked Dr. Jones to comment on this sunsetting provision.
  • Dr. Jones expressed his support for EPSCoR and mentioned how he served on a statewide EPSCoR board of directors as an industry member. He stated that EPSCoR would support new collaborations and improved communications across universities, as well as better policies.
• Ranking Member Wicker predicted that the increased NSF funding for EPSCoR states would result in significant research. He then asked Dr. Jones to elaborate on his testimony’s proposal for virtual research hubs.
  • Dr. Jones noted how traditional research hub models relied upon connecting researchers based on geography. He suggested that the U.S. consider employing virtual research hubs to connect researchers across EPSCoR states based on expertise.
• Ranking Member Wicker lastly asked Mr. Clark to briefly explain NAIRR and its importance.
  • Mr. Clark discussed how NAIRR was an attempt to create a shared national AI infrastructure and stated that this infrastructure sought to put academics on a “level playing field” with the private sector. He noted how his company was able to recruit many top academic researchers through offering them access to better computers. He warned that this dynamic was causing the U.S. to lose teachers and professors that could educate the next generation of students about AI. He commented that NAIRR would therefore help to mitigate this extraction of talent away from academia.

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO):

• Sen. Hickenlooper asked Dr. Sutor to provide recommendations for expanding workforce and educational opportunities in quantum computing. He also asked Dr. Sutor to identify lessons that could be learned from the University of Colorado Boulder and NIST’s work on this issue.
  • Dr. Sutor recounted how NIST and the University of Colorado Boulder had established the Joint Institute for Laboratory Astrophysics (JILA) during the 1960s and noted how JILA now operates the world’s most precise atomic clock. He highlighted how JILA had created many educational opportunities for both undergraduate and graduate students at the University of Colorado Boulder. He also noted how many companies had come out of JILA and commented that JILA’s experience demonstrated how government and academic partnership could support commercial activity. He then discussed how the Colorado School of Mines had recently established a quantum engineering program. He stated that quantum engineering was important because it translated theory into implementation. He explained that this quantum engineering program was multidisciplinary that involved mathematics, physics, and computer science. He also discussed how quantum computing would create many new types of jobs and stated that many of these new types of jobs were currently unknowable. He further remarked that quantum computing would go beyond classical computing. He asserted that these new types of jobs would therefore add to existing jobs (rather than replace them).
• Sen. Hickenlooper then noted how experts have stated that there were up to 21 standards of fairness for AI systems. He highlighted how public and private sector entities often maintained unique standards of fairness and commented that these unique standards could provide the entities with a competitive advantage. He asked Mr. Clark to address how the U.S. could build consensus around common definitions for fairness. He also asked Mr. Clark to address why it was important for policymakers to establish common fairness policies.
  • Mr. Clark noted how NIST currently maintained the Face Recognition Vendor Test (FRVT), which assesses facial recognition systems for fairness and bias. He explained that NIST compiled a variety of tests and approaches from academia and industry into a single test for assessing facial recognition systems. He called for the establishment of a similar test for AI systems so that the U.S. could arrive at an AI testing approach that was fair and representative.
• Sen. Hickenlooper then discussed how AI-powered smartphones provided digital assistants and real-time translation services. He stated that there would need to occur additional R&D so that AI systems could better incorporate contextual data. He asked Dr. Jones to identify additional types of functions that AI could support if AI systems were more understanding of the intentions, tones, and cultural cues behind a voice command.
  • Dr. Jones suggested that Mr. Clark would be better able to answer Sen. Hickenlooper’s question.
  • Mr. Clark remarked that the U.S. needed to test AI systems using a broader swath of Americans so that the systems could reflect more values. He noted how AI systems currently reflected the values of the data on the internet and the companies that built the systems. He commented that these groups were not representative of all Americans. He stated that bringing more people into the testing and evaluation of AI systems would make the systems better able to pick up on cultural cues.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN):

• Sen. Blackburn mentioned how the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in her state of Tennessee was home to the world’s fastest computer. She noted how this computer was capable of executing 1 quintillion floating point operations per second (FLOPS) and commented that his computer was unlocking “tremendous potential.” She asked Mr. Breckenridge to address how supercomputing and quantum technologies would generate economic benefits. She also asked Mr. Breckenridge to discuss how the U.S.’s failure to remain globally competitive in its deployment of quantum technology would harm the U.S.
  • Mr. Breckenridge remarked that the U.S. must focus more on developing supercomputing and quantum technologies. He also called on the U.S. to provide more researchers with access to these technologies. He stated that the supercomputing and quantum technology systems currently available to traditional universities were orders of magnitude smaller than the systems available at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. He contended that increased access to supercomputing and quantum technology systems would be key for the U.S.’s efforts to develop new technologies and its technology workforce. He then remarked that the U.S.’s failure to remain globally competitive in the deployment of HPC and quantum technologies would negatively impact the U.S.’s national security and ability to advance new technologies. He stated that HPC and quantum technologies could provide many benefits, including safer vehicles and improved weather forecasting capabilities.
• Sen. Blackburn commented that quantum technologies could support numerous innovations related to logistics, blockchain technology, cryptocurrencies, and supply chains. She then discussed how the U.S. was currently facing semiconductor shortages and supply chain challenges. She asked Dr. Sutor to address how these semiconductor shortages and supply chain challenges were impacting his company. She also asked Dr. Sutor to project how these shortages and challenges would impact the growth of the U.S.’s technology sector.
  • Dr. Sutor explained that quantum computing involved an integration of classical computing with quantum technology. He stated that any problems with classical computing components (such as semiconductors) would therefore lead to problems with quantum computing. He noted however that new technologies (including PICs and lasers) could help to address the aforementioned challenges. He testified that his company required these new technologies immediately and called on the U.S. to scale up its production of said technologies. He mentioned how many other countries had developed photonics capabilities and contended that the U.S. should not rely upon other countries for these capabilities. He called on the U.S. to undertake a systematic examination of quantum sensing modalities, where these modalities came from, and the feasibility of domestically producing said modalities.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN):

• Sen. Klobuchar remarked that her state of Minnesota was not unique in terms of its current workforce challenges. She noted how Dr. Sutor had previously stated that the future quantum workforce would not solely involve people with doctorate degrees and that this workforce would also require trained workers in manufacturing, IT, and hardware engineering. She asked Dr. Sutor to list some of the trained skills that would be necessary for the next generation of quantum workers.
  • Dr. Sutor first remarked that quantum computer science and software engineering was very different from traditional computer science and software engineering. He asserted that these differences made it critical for the U.S. to begin quantum workforce training at early educational levels (such as at the high school level). He also remarked that the U.S. must focus on the practical applications of quantum computing in addition to the underlying science when training its quantum workforce. He stated that the U.S. would need to be able to manufacture the components for its quantum computing systems.
• Sen. Klobuchar then discussed how Mayo Clinic researchers were partnering with universities and data scientists to use AI to process very complex clinical data. She explained that this processing enabled the researchers to identify the causes of various medical conditions and potential medical treatments. She asked Mr. Clark to provide recommendations for how the U.S. could facilitate AI research partnerships to improve health care.
  • Mr. Clark remarked that the U.S. could facilitate AI research partnerships through removing the complications associated with handling very sensitive data. He stated that NAIRR could support the prototyping of new governance systems that would be sensitive to the health care privacy requirements of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). He asserted that this approach would enable a broader set of researchers to access medical data and develop computational systems that could make use of the data. He further stated that having many researchers review the data would ensure that the data itself was actually fair and representative of the U.S. population.
• Sen. Klobuchar also mentioned how she had worked on bipartisan legislation to promote precision agriculture internet connectivity. She stated that precision agriculture and AI technologies would support more efficient water use and improved planting. She then remarked that there needed to exist more transparency around commonly used recommendation algorithms (such as those algorithms on social media platforms). She mentioned how she had introduced the bipartisan Platform Accountability and Consumer Transparency Act, which would require digital platforms to provide independent verified researchers with access to data with appropriate privacy protections. She noted how Mr. Clark had recommended federal investments in the measuring and monitoring of AI development. She asked Mr. Clark to discuss the types of resources and information that AI researchers would need to fully evaluate how an AI system would impact its users.
  • Mr. Clark remarked that the U.S. needed to provide AI researchers with access to AI systems so that they could run tests on them. He mentioned how he worked on AI systems with billions of parameters and noted how many recommender algorithms involved trillions of parameters. He stated that this large number of parameters underscored the importance of providing researchers with access to the AI systems.
• Sen. Klobuchar also asked Mr. Clark to address how U.S. support for NAIRR could strengthen U.S. global leadership in AI.
  • Mr. Clark remarked that modern AI systems had very large numbers of capabilities and highlighted how many of these capabilities were sometimes unknown until they were fully built and tested. He stated that the NAIRR would enable AI researchers to better ascertain an AI system’s various capabilities and to identify which capabilities might require regulation.

Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY):

• Sen. Lummis first expressed interest in learning about the projects that Dr. Allbritton and the University of Washington were working on.
  • Dr. Allbritton indicated that she was a biomedical engineer and advocated on behalf of all of the University of Washington. She mentioned how she worked on digestive diseases in the intestinal tract. She also discussed how the University of Washington was conducting research related to QIS, battery storage, and AI systems.
• Sen. Lummis then asked Mr. Lupien to explain DLT and to address how it could be used in many different industries. She further asked Mr. Lupien to project the future of DLT.
  • Mr. Lupien described DLT as a new type of database and stated that blockchain technology did not constitute a HPC application. He predicted that DLT would eventually be involved in most aspects of a person’s life. He stated that DLT would enable instantaneous electronic transfers of value around the world. He also remarked that digital assets would play a key role in driving many new technologies, including metaverse technologies. He elaborated that digital assets would likely serve as the payments systems and currencies for metaverses.

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI):

• Sen. Baldwin first highlighted how the University of Wisconsin-Madison was the first university in the U.S. to establish a professional master’s program in quantum computing. She also mentioned supercomputing research was being conducted within her state of Wisconsin. She further noted how she was a member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations and was interested in the policy discussion surrounding CHIPS and Science Act’s funding. She then expressed interest in working to ensure that innovative quantum technology companies could remain viable as they worked to commercialize their products and services.
  • Dr. Sutor discussed how small companies and startup companies were often the creators of new technologies. He noted however that 90 percent of all startup companies fail, which meant that a great deal of innovative technology was not being commercialized. He stated that the U.S. needed to provide longer-term investments to keep innovative startup companies viable as they worked to commercialize their products and services.
• Sen. Baldwin commented that the U.S. government would likely be the ultimate consumer for many innovative technologies, including weather prediction models, defense applications, and communications applications. She then mentioned how China had demonstrated an ability in 2017 to use a quantum repeater to distribute information across great distances between earth and space. She stated that this quantum repeater technology will eventually enable the secure transmission of information that would not be susceptible to eavesdropping. She speculated that China likely had more advanced quantum repeater capabilities than their published work would suggest. She also remarked that the U.S.’s ability to compete with China on innovative technologies would require the U.S. to possess an organic manufacturing base. She commented that this manufacturing base would be necessary to support large scale commercialization efforts for technologies like quantum networking and quantum sensing. She asked Dr. Sutor to identify areas of the U.S. industrial base that policymakers ought to focus on so that the U.S. could maintain a quantum manufacturing edge over China.
  • Dr. Sutor remarked that the hearing’s discussion about quantum computing had been very focused on processing capabilities and not on the data capabilities. He stated that quantum sensors provided data and suggested that policymakers take a “data first” approach when considering quantum technology policy. He also stated that the U.S. needed to bolster its quantum memory capabilities to support its quantum networking initiatives.

Sen. Todd Young (R-IN):

• Sen. Young remarked that the recently enacted CHIPS and Science Act would strengthen the U.S.’s global leadership in emerging technologies. He highlighted the CHIPS and Science Act’s provision related to regional technology hubs and stated that the provision would activate underutilized and overlooked regions around the U.S. He also commented that this provision would support innovations in critical emerging technologies, such as quantum computing and AI. He remarked that his state of Indiana would benefit “enormously” from the establishment of regional technology hubs. He expressed interest in ensuring that the regional technology hub provision of the CHIPS and Science Act would be funded. He asked Mr. Clark to indicate why it was important for Congress to fully fund the CHIPS and Science Act. He also asked Mr. Clark to address how this funding would impact AI research and innovation.
  • Mr. Clark remarked that the CHIPS and Science Act would provide AI researchers with more ways to test and assess AI systems for both economic capabilities and safety issues. He stated that supporting more public evaluations of AI systems would enable more AI applications. He also remarked that the CHIPS and Science Act would support more ambitious AI infrastructure in the public sector, which would enable academics to perform more impactful work.
• Sen. Young then asked Dr. Sutor to discuss how quantum technologies could support real-world applications for ordinary Americans.
  • Dr. Sutor highlighted how quantum technology was already powering magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machines and global positioning systems (GPS) systems. He elaborated that many satellites contained quantum atomic clocks that provided both precise locations and very reliable time stamps. He predicted that quantum technology would increasingly support new applications used by ordinary Americans.
• Sen. Young stated that the U.S. was working to advance quantum technology through the CHIPS and Science Act and the National Quantum Initiative program. He asked Dr. Sutor to identify additional actions that the U.S. could take to ensure that the U.S. would be the global leader in quantum technology.
  • Dr. Sutor remarked that the U.S.’s global competitiveness in the quantum technology space would ultimately depend on its quantum talent and skills. He stated that the U.S. would need to either develop quantum talent among its citizens or attract quantum talent from abroad.
• Sen. Young highlighted how the CHIPS and Science Act included provisions that would help to attract international talent and investments into the U.S. to support the development of innovative technologies.

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO):

• Sen. Hickenlooper remarked that the U.S. possessed a competitive advantage regarding its ability to attract highly skilled scientists from around the world. He asked the witnesses to address the importance of enabling talent to immigrate to the U.S. as a way to support the U.S.’s development of emerging technologies.
  • Dr. Allbritton remarked that the U.S. needed to attract as much research talent as possible. She noted how many researchers at U.S. universities come from abroad and how many U.S. startups have foreign born founders. She stated that facilitating immigration to the U.S. for talented researchers would provide the U.S. with a technological advantage over other countries, which would make the U.S. wealthier, more diverse, and more productive.
  • Mr. Clark indicated that he was a recently naturalized U.S. citizen and testified that 43 percent of his company’s workers were foreign born. He lamented how many technology workers and researchers were sometimes unable to remain in the U.S.
  • Mr. Breckenridge remarked that the U.S. needed to attract the smartest people into technology research. He also stated that the U.S. should focus on expanding the number of American STEM researchers.
  • Dr. Sutor indicated that ColdQuanta had already expanded its operations abroad and mentioned how the company maintained an office in the United Kingdom (UK). He stated that international partnerships were “extremely important” for helping the U.S. to reach its research and technology goals.
  • Dr. Jones remarked that the U.S. did not have a monopoly on intelligence, ambition, and the desire to change the world. He stated that the U.S. ought to therefore work to attract research talent from around the world.
  • Mr. Lupien remarked that the U.S. needed to create favorable regulatory environments to attract research talent and innovative companies. He commented that companies generally wanted to do business within the U.S.

Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV):

• Sen. Rosen remarked that the U.S. would need to have a strong workforce to work on AI applications for cybersecurity. She highlighted an Acumen Research and Consulting estimate indicating that the global market for AI-enabled security products would exceed $133 billion by 2030. She stated that AI technology was “rapidly” evolving and called it essential for the U.S. to research this area. She also called it important for all industries to have access to AI-enabled security products so that they could better protect themselves against cyberattacks. She asked Mr. Clark to discuss how AI-enabled tools could be used to strengthen cybersecurity across industries. She also asked Mr. Clark to identify the shortcomings of AI as a cybersecurity solution.
  • Mr. Clark noted how AI systems could now understand, write, and generate code and stated that these capabilities enabled AI systems to identify errors in code. He remarked however that AI-generated code within the cybersecurity context would still require human reviews and vigorous testing before deployment.
• Sen. Rosen then discussed how the U.S. had a STEM and cyber workforce shortage and mentioned how she had introduced bipartisan legislation that would make federal investments in cybersecurity apprenticeships. She also mentioned how she was the co-chair of the bipartisan Women in STEM Caucus. She asked Dr. Allbritton to provide recommendations for developing a more robust U.S. STEM workforce. She suggested that the U.S. consider creating apprenticeship programs, certificate programs, two-year degree programs, and four-year degree programs to achieve this goal. She also expressed interest in ensuring that this new STEM workforce would include women and underrepresented communities.
  • Dr. Allbritton remarked that the U.S. needed to make long-term and stable investments in STEM education. She stated that the returns on these investments might take several years to materialize and commented that policymakers would need to exhibit patience with these investments. She also stated that these STEM education efforts would need to start early (such as at the high school or elementary school levels).
• Sen. Rosen expressed her agreement with Dr. Allbritton’s comments regarding the importance of providing STEM education at an early level.

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO):

• Sen. Hickenlooper asked Mr. Breckenridge to provide recommendations for promoting equitable access to supercomputing. 
  • Mr. Breckenridge remarked that HPC was becoming ubiquitous and noted that most (if not all) research universities possess some HPC assets. He stated that the U.S. needed to broaden access to other types of emerging technologies (such as quantum computing). He commented that a lack of immediate access to emerging technologies could limit innovation opportunities for both researchers and students.

Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI):

• Sen. Peters remarked that his state of Michigan was the home of the U.S. automotive industry and noted how this industry had been investing “significant” resources into AI systems to pilot AVs. He asked Mr. Clark to discuss the existing barriers to testing, evaluating, and benchmarking AI systems and to recommend resources for addressing these barriers.
  • Mr. Clark remarked that large-scale high-fidelity simulators would be “crucial” for developing AV technology. He elaborated that AV developers would need to simulate cities, people, weather, and other conditions when testing AVs. He noted how large-scale high-fidelity simulations required large amounts of computational power. He stated that providing researchers with access to computational power would enable them to run these high-fidelity simulations and to develop AV technology.
• Sen. Peters then raised concerns that AI could pose certain cybersecurity risks and commented that AI could increase the speed and agility of the U.S.’s adversaries. He asked Mr. Clark to provide recommendations for improving the U.S.’s cybersecurity capabilities considering these advances in AI.
  • Mr. Clark stated that the U.S. could pair AI systems with human experts to address its cybersecurity needs. He also stated that the U.S. needed to analyze foreign cyber activity trends. He mentioned how foreign entities were using cyber methods to both bolster their own cybersecurity and to engage in offensive cyberattacks. He commented that a lack of understanding of these trends could lead to a surprise cyberattack against the U.S.
• Sen. Peters then mentioned how the Biden administration had issued a May 2022 national security memorandum requiring the federal government to engage more proactively with critical infrastructure owners and operators. He indicated that this memorandum had sought to ease the migration of computer systems toward quantum resistant cryptography. He asked Dr. Sutor to identify the key challenges associated with this migration for the private sector.
  • Dr. Sutor noted how it could take a bank up to ten years to move to a new cryptographic protocol. He remarked that it was therefore important for the U.S. to proactively upgrade its encryption systems in anticipation of future capabilities. He also stated that the U.S. needed to consider export controls for areas that might seek to use quantum computing to engage in cyberattacks against U.S. entities.

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO):

• Sen. Hickenlooper asked Dr. Allbritton to discuss the advantages associated with making AI systems more trustworthy.
  • Dr. Allbritton remarked that the advantages associated with making AI systems more trustworthy were “unbounded.” She stated that more trustworthy AI systems would be less prone to discrimination and would lead to more equity, diversity, and opportunity. She added that this increased equity, diversity, and opportunity would lead to increased economic productivity.
• Sen. Hickenlooper expressed agreement with Dr. Allbritton’s response.