ClaimsDaniela Amodei

“we've been supporting NIST, which is the National Institute for Standards and Technology on developing something called an AI Risk Management Framework.”

Daniela Amodei, Anthropic president, interview 4 March 2022 Daniela and Dario Amodei on Anthropic (Future of Life Institute)

Factual AI policy and governance

Anthropic has been supporting NIST in developing an AI Risk Management Framework.

Unresolvable The public record could not settle it.

Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?

Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.

What would count as true or false

Judge as of 2022-03-04. True: records show that by that date Anthropic contributed to NIST's AI Risk Management Framework development, for example by submitting comments on the RFI or concept paper or by taking part in workshops. Mostly true: Anthropic's support is documented but began very shortly after the statement, or it was minimal (a single comment) yet real. Mixed: only indirect support is shown, such as through a coalition, and no direct Anthropic contribution. Mostly false: Anthropic's involvement was only planned or nominal, with no contribution made by that date. False: NIST's records of contributors and comments for that period show no Anthropic involvement.

Set before the research began.

Evidence (6)

  1. E1 AI Risk Management Framework Concept Paper NIST · 13 December 2021

    “NIST intends to publish that initial draft for public comment in early 2022, as well as to hold additional workshops, with the goal of releasing the AI RMF 1.0 in early 2023.”

  2. E2 Brief Summary NIST · 15 October 2021

    “The responses were supportive of NIST’s effort to develop the AI RMF.”

  3. E3 Comments on the 1st Draft of AI Risk Management Framework NIST · 18 May 2022

    “1st Draft AI RMF Comments on the initial draft of the AI Risk Management Framework”

  4. E4 AI RMF RFI Comments NIST

    “Anthropic (https://www.anthropic.com/);”

  5. E5 NIST Seeks Comments on Concept Paper for AI Risk Management Framework NIST · 14 December 2021

    “The paper incorporates input from a NIST Request for Information (RFI) and an October workshop.”

  6. E6 AI Risk Management Framework - Engage NIST · 13 July 2021

    “many organizations and individuals have contributed their insights to NIST, which has considered all suggestions.”

Reasoning

The NIST records provided describe the AI RMF process, including the RFI, the October workshop, the concept paper and broad unnamed contributions (E1, E2, E5, E6). None of them shows Anthropic submitting comments or taking part in workshops by 2022-03-04. E4, a NIST-hosted RFI comment document, lists Anthropic's name, but the excerpt does not show in what capacity, so it does not establish an Anthropic contribution; no evidence shows NIST's contributor records excluding Anthropic either. The evidence therefore does not settle the claim.

Cite this claim

Daniela Amodei, “Anthropic has been supporting NIST in developing an AI Risk Management Framework.” (said 4 March 2022). Verdict: unresolvable. Reliability API, claim c_b9f92afa9e84, method 0.1.0+28da144b, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_b9f92afa9e84

This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.

Reply to this claim

For Daniela Amodei, or someone speaking for them: a correction or counter-evidence. Replies are read before anything is shown; an approved reply shows your name, role, date, statement and link. Your email address is never shown and is deleted 30 days after the decision (privacy).

More factual claims by Daniela Amodei

  1. Mostly true Factual 4 March 2022
    “And the goal of that is really developing more monitoring tools around AI risk and AI risk management.”

    The goal of NIST's AI Risk Management Framework is to develop more monitoring tools for AI risk and its management.

  2. Mostly true Factual 4 March 2022
    “there's no required disclosure of when you're interacting with an AI system versus a human”

    As of 2022 there is no required disclosure of whether a person is interacting with an AI system or a human.

  3. Mostly true Factual 2022
    “there's no clear guidelines around how to do that now”

    As of 2022 there are no clear guidelines for AI labs on how to avoid advancing race dynamics or do the right thing on safety.

  4. Resolved true Factual 2022
    “there's no clear guidelines around how to do that now, right.”

    As of 2022 there are no clear guidelines for AI developers on how to avoid advancing race dynamics or do the right thing on safety.

  5. Mostly false Factual 27 October 2026
    “This was an immovable baseline established from day one.”

    Daniela Amodei said the decision to keep ads out of Claude was an immovable baseline established from day one.

All of them

Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.