{"procurement":{"label":"For procurement","reader":"A contracting officer who buys an AI system or service","document":"OMB Memorandum M-25-22, Driving Efficient Acquisition of Artificial Intelligence in Government","date":"2025-04-03","section":"Section 4(b)(iii), Performance-Based Acquisition Techniques","url":"https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/M-25-22-Driving-Efficient-Acquisition-of-Artificial-Intelligence-in-Government.pdf","passage":"Resulting performance-based requirements allow agencies to understand and assess vendor claims about their proposed use of AI systems or services prior to contract award.","scope":"every benefit","file":"for-procurement.csv","benefits":1148,"columns":["id","benefit","vendor","AI system or service","deployed by","who supports the claim","measured against","without the AI","with the AI","what happened later","costs and harms","link"]},"impact-assessment":{"label":"For impact assessment","reader":"The federal program owner who assesses a high-impact use of AI","document":"OMB Memorandum M-25-21, Accelerating Federal Use of AI through Innovation, Governance, and Public Trust","date":"2025-04-03","section":"Section 4(b)(ii), items A, E and F","url":"https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/M-25-21-Accelerating-Federal-Use-of-AI-through-Innovation-Governance-and-Public-Trust.pdf","passage":"the intended purpose for the AI and its expected benefit, supported by specific metrics or qualitative analysis, assessing impact inclusive of but not limited to costs, customer experience, or expected positive outcomes of AI use, as compared to existing agency processes","scope":"every benefit","file":"for-impact-assessment.csv","benefits":1148,"columns":["id","benefit","intended purpose for the AI","specific metrics","as compared to","without the AI","with the AI","expected savings","results of independent review","link"]},"clinical-use":{"label":"For clinical use","reader":"A hospital's chief medical information officer","document":"The Joint Commission and the Coalition for Health AI, Guidance on the Responsible Use of AI in Healthcare (RUAIH)","date":"2025-09-17","section":"Element 4, Ongoing Quality Monitoring","url":"https://digitalassets.jointcommission.org/api/public/content/dcfcf4f1a0cc45cdb526b3cb034c68c2","passage":"During procurement, healthcare organizations should request information from developers/vendors on how AI tools were tested and validated for their intended use, whether they are willing to tune and/or validate a sample that is representative of the deployment context, and how relevant biases were evaluated.","scope":"the benefits in health","file":"for-clinical-use.csv","benefits":299,"columns":["id","benefit","developer or vendor","AI tool","deployment context","how it was tested and validated","sample","use-case relevant outcome","who supports it","what happened later","what the sources leave unknown","link"]},"regulation":{"label":"For regulation","reader":"The European Commission and its AI Office, when they weigh a change to Annex III","document":"Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, the Artificial Intelligence Act","date":"2024-06-13","section":"Article 7(2)(j)","url":"https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj","passage":"the magnitude and likelihood of benefit of the deployment of the AI system for individuals, groups, or society at large, including possible improvements in product safety","scope":"every benefit","note":"The database grades how strongly its sources show that a benefit happened. That grade is the nearest field to the likelihood of benefit, and it is not the same thing. The database has no field for product safety, so the sector stands in for it.","file":"for-regulation.csv","benefits":1148,"columns":["id","benefit","AI system","deployed by","for individuals, groups, or society at large","depth, from 1 to 5","magnitude","how far it happened","evidence","sector","link"]},"court-use":{"label":"For court use","reader":"Judges, court administrators and court staff","document":"UNESCO, Guidelines for the Use of AI Systems in Courts and Tribunals","date":"2025-12-03","section":"Principles 1.3, 1.6 and 1.13","url":"https://doi.org/10.58338/LIEY8089","passage":"Before adopting AI systems, the judiciary should assess both the specific potential benefits (for the judiciary, users, and the public) and its institutional capacity to realise these benefits.","scope":"the benefits in the justice system","file":"for-court-use.csv","benefits":57,"columns":["id","benefit","for whom","how the system's work was checked","the system's part","human oversight","what must hold for it to happen again","evidence","what the sources leave unknown","link"]}}