Think tank · Policy · Washington, DC
The Institute for AI Policy and Strategy (IAPS) is a nonpartisan U.S. 501(c)(3) think tank focused on technically grounded AI policy research at the intersection of frontier AI, national security, and geopolitics. IAPS describes its mission as equipping policymakers and industry leaders to protect innovation while navigating high-magnitude risks and opportunities created by advanced AI capabilities.
Its work concentrates on three programmatic areas: Frontier Security (including cyber/autonomy implications and preparedness), Compute Policy (including strategic considerations for managing access to massive AI compute resources and mechanisms for enforcement of U.S. export controls), and International Strategy (including U.S.–China competition and institutional capacity such as AI safety institutes). Strategically, IAPS positions itself as an applied policy research organization: it publishes public policy research reports and provides responses to government requests for information, while also convening policy talent through programs such as its AI Policy Fellowship. In its governance materials, IAPS emphasizes editorial control by its team and states that it does not lobby and does not allow donor interests to compromise research integrity. IAPS’s recent direction shows an emphasis on compute governance, cybersecurity and autonomy risks, and international coordination mechanisms for AI incidents and governance—often framed in national-security terms such as export controls, assurance, infrastructure security, and adversary capability development.
Following an agreement between the United States and China to establish a “notification mechanism” for AI incidents that could affect national security, this memo outlines a structure to operationalize the channel quickly. We explain why the two sides should establish a text-base
Cloud Compute: A Policy Escalation FrameworkChinese developers and hyperscalers are already renting frontier-scale U.S. AI compute from cloud service providers outside China. Washington needs a clear strategy to address national security risks posed by remote access to its most advanced compute. In our new report, we recom
Honeypots for AI Agent Insider ThreatsAI agent adoption at scale presents a new version of an old security problem—the insider threat. Existing approaches to monitoring and controlling AI agents provide important but incomplete defenses. Our new report describes how honeypots, decoys placed inside systems to catch un
Embedded Evaluators for Frontier AI: Contractual Foundations for Credible AssessmentsCan embedded evaluators provide a real check on frontier AI companies? This depends on the contracts agreed by companies and the independent experts brought in-house to assess safety and security practices. For evaluators’ work to be credible and meaningful, and to identify serio
Preparing for Offensive Cyber Agents: Piloting AI-Enabled Penetration Testing and Red TeamingU.S. policy needs to prioritize hardening the cyber landscape, which is highly vulnerable to increasingly capable offensive cyber agents—AI systems that autonomously carry out attacks. AI-enabled pentesting and red teaming supported by federal pilots could address many of the cha
Differential Automation: Steering Automated Research and Development Toward Safety and SecurityAI companies are increasingly automating research and development (R&D) processes, advancing powerful AI systems and compressing timelines for the implementation of necessary safeguards. To manage the risks posed by fully automated AI R&D, or recursive self-improvement (RSI), our
Priorities for Frontier AI PolicyThe capabilities of advanced AI models are improving rapidly, raising the stakes for the development of safe, secure, and beneficial AI. To meet this challenge, a comprehensive set of policies is urgently required to govern the most powerful AI systems across their full lifecycle
Establishing a U.S.-China AI Risk and Incident DialogueAs the risk of acute AI incidents with destabilizing impacts increases, now is the time to develop communications channels between the U.S. and China before they are needed in a crisis. This report proposes an AI Risk and Incident Dialogue between the two countries, informed by t
Near-Term Verification Methods for AI Chip ExportsU.S. export controls on AI chips are being undermined by insufficient enforcement and a lack of resources. This report serves as an implementation guide for policymakers to strengthen enforcement through verification mechanisms that can be active within a year.
Evaluating LLM Capabilities for Commodity ClassificationAutomating commodity classification, a common task at the Bureau of Industry and Security, could speed up processing of export licenses and provide experience in building in-house AI tools. This brief sets out why a pilot program to test LLMs for this task in a more realistic env
The OpenAI/Hugging Face Incident: Challenges in Controlling and Containing Cyber-Capable AI SystemsThe OpenAI/Hugging Face incident is the first known instance of an AI system acting outside its developer’s intentions to autonomously identify a target and execute an attack end-to-end. Policymakers should consider it a warning shot that has left critical questions unanswered. I
Remote Access Security Act (RASA)U.S. export controls restrict selling advanced AI chips to China, but do not clearly reach the same compute when it is rented remotely through the cloud. The Remote Access Security Act (RASA) would close this gap in the Bureau of Industry and Security’s authorities. This brief as
IAPS announced the appointment of Leigh Nolan as Policy Director, describing her prior U.S. government national security experience and her role in advancing IAPS’s mission of connecting research with AI policy.
In Foreign Affairs: Cyberwar’s New FrontierIAPS researchers Brianna Rosen and Jam Kraprayoon argued in Foreign Affairs that autonomous AI cyber-agents represent a new category of national security threat, and outlined needed technical defenses, institutional capacity, and international norms.
IAPS 2025 Year in ReviewIAPS summarized its 2025 highlights, including publishing 8 major reports, expanding media and policy engagement, reporting legislative impact tied to specific U.S. bills, finalizing an AI Policy Fellowship cohort of 29 fellows from 5,600+ applicants, and welcoming 10 new staff members.
The Institute for AI Policy and Strategy Appoints Jenny Marron as Executive DirectorIAPS announced Jenny Marron’s appointment as Executive Director, and also described leadership transitions including Peter Wildeford moving to Chief Strategy Officer and other promotions within IAPS leadership.
The Trump Administration’s AI Action PlanIAPS published an analysis of the Trump Administration’s AI Action Plan, highlighting proposed priorities and linking several stated or featured proposals (e.g., export controls via location verification and AI security/assurance R&D) to IAPS work.
America's AI Action Plan: Strategic Implications for National Security and Global CompetitionIAPS announced a virtual panel discussion hosted on July 24, 2025 focused on strategic implications of the AI Action Plan, including speaker participation by policy and legal practitioners and IAPS leadership.