[Senate Hearing 117-865]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                        S. Hrg. 117-865
        
                    SECURING U.S. LEADERSHIP IN EMERGING 
                           COMPUTE TECHNOLOGIES

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                         COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                      SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                           SEPTEMBER 29, 2022

                               __________

    Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                             Transportation
                             
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]                             


                Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov
                
                               __________

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
55-822 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2024                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                  
               
       SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                   MARIA CANTWELL, Washington, Chair
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota             ROGER WICKER, Mississippi, Ranking
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut      JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii                 ROY BLUNT, Missouri
EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts         TED CRUZ, Texas
GARY PETERS, Michigan                DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin             JERRY MORAN, Kansas
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois            DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
JON TESTER, Montana                  MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona              TODD YOUNG, Indiana
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada                  MIKE LEE, Utah
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico            RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Colorado          SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West 
RAPHAEL WARNOCK, Georgia                 Virginia
                                     RICK SCOTT, Florida
                                     CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming
                       Lila Helms, Staff Director
                 Melissa Porter, Deputy Staff Director
       George Greenwell, Policy Coordinator and Security Manager
                 John Keast, Republican Staff Director
            Crystal Tully, Republican Deputy Staff Director
                      Steven Wall, General Counsel
                           
                           C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Hearing held on September 29, 2022...............................     1
Statement of Senator Cantwell....................................     1
Statement of Senator Wicker......................................     3
Statement of Senator Hickenlooper................................     4
Statement of Senator Blackburn...................................    42
Statement of Senator Klobuchar...................................    43
Statement of Senator Lummis......................................    45
Statement of Senator Baldwin.....................................    47
Statement of Senator Young.......................................    48
Statement of Senator Rosen.......................................    51
Statement of Senator Peters......................................    54

                               Witnesses

Nancy Albritton, M.D., Ph.D., Frank and Julie Jungers Dean 
  College of Engineering Dean, University of Washington..........     6
    Prepared statement...........................................     8
Jack Clark, Co-founder, Anthropic, Co-chair, AI Index. Member, 
  National AI Advisory Committee.................................    10
    Prepared statement...........................................    12
William B. (Trey) Breckenridge III, Director, High Performance 
  Computing Collaboratory, Mississippi State University..........    18
    Prepared statement...........................................    20
Steven C. Lupien, Director, University of Wyoming Center for 
  Blockchain and Digital Innovation..............................    21
    Prepared statement...........................................    23
Dr. Bob Sutor, Vice President, Corporate Development, ColdQuanta.    24
    Prepared statement...........................................    26
Henry L. Jones II, Ph.D., Director, Research Development and 
  Scientific Entrepreneurship, University of Southern Mississippi    33
    Prepared statement...........................................    34

                                Appendix

Response to written questions submitted to Dr. Nancy Albritton 
  by:
    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    57
    Hon. Kyrsten Sinema..........................................    58
    Hon. Raphael Warnock.........................................    60
Response to written questions submitted to William B. (Trey) 
  Breckenridge III by:
    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    62
    Hon. Kyrsten Sinema..........................................    63
    Hon. Raphael Warnock.........................................    64
Response to written questions submitted to Dr. Bob Sutor by:
    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    65
    Hon. Kyrsten Sinema..........................................    67
    Hon. Ray Ben Lujan...........................................    68
    Hon. Raphael Warnock.........................................    69
Response to written question submitted to Henry L. Jones II, 
  Ph.D. by:
    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    71
Hon. Kyrsten Sinema..............................................    72
    Hon. Raphael Warnock.........................................    73

 
       SECURING U.S. LEADERSHIP IN EMERGING COMPUTE TECHNOLOGIES

                              ----------                              


                      THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2022

                                        U.S. Senate
        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., in 
room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Maria 
Cantwell, Chair of the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Cantwell [presiding], Klobuchar, 
Blumenthal, Peters, Baldwin, Rosen, Lujan, Hickenlooper, 
Wicker, Fischer, Blackburn, Young, and Lummis.

           OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON

    The Chair. Good morning. The Senate Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation will come to order. This morning, 
we will be having a hearing on securing U.S. leadership in 
emerging compute technologies, or in other words, what do we do 
with the CHIPS and Science money and the actual appropriations 
that we need to get to keep our competitive edge in compute 
science.
    So very distinguished panel here this morning to discuss 
this very important issue. I would like to welcome all of them. 
In August, the President signed the bipartisan CHIPS and 
Science Act into law with historic commitment to U.S. 
technology leadership.
    This hearing is about ensuring what we do as a nation to 
keep that commitment by building the workforce needed to stay 
competitive in the most leading edge and consequential 
computational disciplines.
    Leading the world in computation grows the economy, creates 
new jobs, and keeps America safe. Computing helped put 
Americans on the Moon, develop faster and stealthier planes, 
better weather forecasting artificial intelligence for 
precision agriculture.
    That is why the CHIPS and Science Act was so focused on 
building America's computing capabilities. America knows that 
the new law invested more than $50 billion into chip 
manufacturing, and they already are seeing results.
    The groundbreaking announcements in Ohio, Idaho, North 
Carolina, and even in my home state of Washington have all put 
manufacturing resurgence to a point of gaining steam. But just 
as important in the law is the focus on research and workforce 
development in ten key technology areas. Four of these areas, 
artificial intelligence, semiconductors, quantum science, and 
distributed ledger technologies deal with improving 
computation.
    Job openings in these areas are soaring, but the number of 
workers definitely is not keeping pace. It is a crisis. That is 
why the CHIPS and Science Act authorized $13 billion for STEM 
education, including funds for nearly 40,000 scholarships, 
fellowships, and traineeships. That is why it has money for 
faculty hiring and training.
    And make no mistake, America's workforce shortages are 
serious. And failing to make these investments and failing to 
retain the talent from around the world is not an option. With 
six decades of AI development, computers now operate vehicles, 
translate languages, create art, help on the factory floor, and 
most of you know in this room are probably hearing AI 
technologies right now.
    But AI doesn't work alone, and it is far from perfect. It 
must be trained by humans and must often be partnered with the 
human in doing the work, and that means we need a generation of 
AI literate workers. A recent Georgetown study supported that 
we will add 1 million AI jobs between 2019 and 2029.
    AI requires vast amounts of information and excellent data 
retrieval capabilities, which is one of the promises of 
distributed ledger technologies. But in the computation--but in 
the computer science foundational discipline for this 
technology, universities are turning away students because the 
supply of teachers isn't keeping up with demand.
    The country that combines the power of quantum computing 
with artificial intelligence could make an insurmountable leap 
forward in technology and rewrite the rules of the road for 
cybersecurity, for creating medical innovations and saving 
thousands of lives, and developing battlefield technologies.
    The nation faces a shortage of a quantum talent, with fewer 
than 5 percent of U.S. PhDs in relevant fields focusing on 
quantum science. So the stakes are high. International 
competition is mounting. Funding for CHIPS and Science must not 
stop with the appropriations for chip manufacturing.
    America needs access to better chips, but it also needs the 
research and workforce to put those chips to use. So that is 
why I am proud to have with us one of our witnesses, Dr. 
Albritton, who we will hear from shortly. Washington is a 
leader in emerging computational technology.
    Seattle has the Nation's third largest AI workforce. The 
University of Washington is one of the Nation's top 
institutions for AI. In the Spokane region, home to more than 
7,000 farms and ranches, WSU leads the Institute on Agriculture 
AI with a focus on AI enabled workforce, and companies like 
Amazon, Microsoft, T-Mobile and Starbucks are applying 
distributed ledger technologies to telecommunications and 
supply chain.
    And we are building the quantum workforce through the 
efforts like the University of Washington's Quantum X 
Institute, which is creating a graduate certificate program in 
quantum science. With the CHIPS and Science Act, I hope to see 
Washington continue to grow this leadership and developing a 
workforce.
    Each of these technologies will face challenges, but if 
America is to lead, we need to continue to lead in talent. So I 
look forward to hearing from the distinguished panel today, and 
I will now turn to the Ranking Member for his opening 
statement.

                STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER WICKER, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI

    Senator Wicker. Thank you, Madam Chair. And let me say of 
all the legislation that you and I have worked shoulder to 
shoulder on, I can't think of anything more significant for the 
future of our country, and not only our economy but also our 
national security, than the CHIPS and Science Act.
    And so thank you so much for being my partner in that 
regard and for persuading the House and Senate to include the 
very significant additions that we made. Today's hearing on 
securing U.S. leadership in emerging technologies could not be 
more timely.
    The recently enacted CHIPS and Science Act provided 
critical investments and policy tools to advance American 
innovation in key technologies, including, as the chair said, 
quantum computing, artificial intelligence, and blockchain.
    The development of these emerging technologies is important 
but also poses important questions for policymakers involving 
security, privacy, and other impacts on society. Today's 
witnesses play key roles in technology development and 
innovation.
    The Chair is proud of witnesses from the state of 
Washington, and I am similarly delighted that Dr. Henry Jones 
is here, the Director of Research and Development and 
Scientific Entrepreneurship at the University of Southern 
Mississippi, and Mr. Trey Breckenridge, the Director of High 
Performance Computing at Mississippi State University.
    I look forward to hearing their thoughts on spreading the 
geography of innovation when it comes to innovation. The--one 
of the most significant provisions that we were able to add, 
Madam Chair, is to spread the geography and avoid overreliance 
on a handful of States and big universities. American 
leadership requires that we take advantage of the talent, 
expertise, and capabilities found throughout America.
    In that vein, I would appreciate eyewitnesses? perspectives 
on where the United States ranks regarding the development of 
these emerging technologies, particularly as compared to China, 
and what more should be done to secure a preeminent position. 
China and other nations are increasingly dominant in technology 
innovation, posing a massive threat not only to our economy, 
but, as I said, to national security.
    There is no more important competition than the one for 
technological supremacy between the United States and China. 
Congress has recognized this fact and has taken the first step 
by passing the CHIPS and Science Act, which would position the 
United States to be a global leader once again.
    This law establishes a new Directorate for Technology, 
Innovation and Partnerships at the NSF to accelerate the 
process of translating basic research into technology 
development for commercial use and making America more 
competitive globally. Geographic diversity is a vital--is vital 
to American innovation and enlisting the talent and expertise 
of STEM researchers nationwide is an important priority.
    In the CHIPS and Science Act, the law guarantees that 
EPSCoR, a program designed to stimulate competitive research in 
25 predominantly rural states, will receive 20 percent of all 
R&D funding from the NSF, up from the current 13 percent. This 
will go a long way toward developing--toward leveraging the 
whole of America's technological expertise in this global 
contest.
    Make no mistake, ensuring that America leads the world in 
tech is good for our economy and national security, and it is 
also good for the cause of freedom, stability, openness, and 
our democratic values around the world. With the right vision 
and priorities, we in Congress can make sure the 21st century 
is another American century. So I look forward to hearing from 
our distinguished witnesses, and I thank the Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you, Senator Wicker. And thank you for 
your leadership on the EPSCoR issue, particularly. It was 
something that we spent a lot of time on. And I firmly believe 
I saw this morning that Steve Case has a book, ``The Rise of 
the Rest.''
    And I think with the Intel investment in Ohio and what we 
are doing, I don't want to steal Dr. Albritton's testimony, but 
I think she is going to tell us she is originally from 
Louisiana, and I think that is the point, that we have talent 
all throughout the United States of America and what do we do 
to better unleash that.
    And hopefully today's hearing will be a very poignant point 
forward to our appropriators that we have to get the rest of 
this right. But now I am going to----
    Senator Wicker. Madam Chair, if because of your statement, 
sales of Mr. Case's book shoot through the roof, the Case 
family will be able to have Christmas this year.
    The Chair. I am pretty sure they can anyway, but I probably 
would have had him come in--this is a hard subject because it 
is not hard, it is distributed generation. But when we were 
definitely in the negotiations, we spent a lot of time on this 
for a lot of different reasons. And some institutions who are 
already making R&D contributions, it is hard.
    But I think we got it right and I think that we are going 
to move forward, and I think we are going to see the dividend 
of that. So thank you for your leadership. Senator Hickenlooper 
from the Subcommittee is going to make an opening statement.

             STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN HICKENLOOPER, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO

    Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Madam Chair. I thank all 
of you for schlepping out here and spending the better part of 
a day with us. It is exciting to be part of such an impressive 
group. The recently passed CHIPS and Science Act really is a 
massive investment in our country's future.
    I was proud to be a conferee on the bipartisan Innovation 
and Competition Conference, part of that. The drive that R&D 
receives is what helps our economy grow, it improves our public 
health, it strengthens our national defense. It affects us in 
almost every manner possibly.
    When I was a kid, there was a movie called, Being There, 
written by a guy named Jerzy Kosinski who, Chance the gardener, 
turned out to be an expert in the economy. And basically he was 
rather simple minded. But his metaphor he used for everything 
was back to the garden, whether it had the nutrients.
    The garden as an ecosystem. Well, I think what the CHIPS 
bill does is invest $200 billion into our scientific ecosystem. 
And just like the garden in Being There, the nutrients and the 
diversity of what is in that ecosystem is crucial to its 
success. We need to grow and diversify our skilled workforce, 
making sure we have pathways other than the traditional 4-year 
degree.
    We have to increase manufacturing and innovation in every 
part of the nation, as Madam Chair was just saying. Steve Case 
and others have begun that process of looking into rural areas 
all across America and finding out how do we stimulate 
innovation everywhere. We are in a fierce rivalry, a fierce 
competition with China, around a number of countries, and we 
need everybody on deck.
    We are thrilled to see last week that the Senate confirmed 
Dr. Prabhakar to head the White House Office of Science and 
Technology Policy. She is going to play a pivotal role in 
implementing CHIPS and Science by developing the National 
Science and Technology Strategy, and perhaps more importantly, 
coordinating the efforts across all the Federal agencies and 
with the different offices of the White House.
    I think what we are doing here today is really discussing 
the future of computing to a large extent. We have three 
focuses today that showcase what we can already achieve, but 
also what we will be able to do in the near future. One, 
artificial intelligence, AI, has the power to automate complex 
processes and improve our efficiency in every sector of our 
economy.
    As more and more businesses incorporate AI into their 
operations, we need to accelerate that integration. We must 
ensure that these systems are transparent, and as much as 
possible, free from bias.
    I applaud the National AI Initiative Office's efforts to 
gather broad public input and to convene experts from 
Government, academia, and industry to make sure we get off on 
the right path. Second, quantum information science, UIS, is an 
advanced field, which I am proud to say, deep history in 
Colorado. It will transform the future of computing and let us 
run simulations with staggering speed.
    Colorado's own ColdQuanta, Dr. Sutor is here, is on the 
cutting edge, some would say the bleeding edge, of this 
computing revolution. NIST has a partnership with CU Boulder to 
advance quantum technologies through their joint institute, the 
JILA, including world record accurate atomic clocks.
    Further partnership with CU Boulder, NIST, and front range 
companies has joined together to form the CUBIT, I did not come 
up with that acronym, CUBIT initiative, which is going to help 
accelerate our growing quantum ecosystem in Colorado, and I 
think in a similar way, we will accelerate ecosystems around 
the country.
    Third, after quantum information science's distributed 
ledger technology, DLT, often implemented as blockchains, is 
more popularly known as blockchains, can improve security of 
financial transactions, support innovations and data privacy. 
All kinds of implementations, health care just being one.
    A major DLT innovation hub is located in Wyoming, the home 
of space and science subcommittee's Ranking Member, Senator 
Lummis. Today, I look forward to discussing important topics 
for all these technologies. They are so important to Colorado 
and to the Nation.
    Which barriers should we break down to make sure that we do 
grow a skilled STEM workforce in all these fields? What are the 
guardrails we need to make sure we create to ensure these 
technologies are developed transparently, used ethically, and 
benefiting everyday lives of all Americans.
    With the springboard created by the historic CHIPS and 
Science Act, how do we ensure that the United States remains 
the global gold standard for innovation in each of these 
fields? So I thank all of you for joining us in delving into 
these issues and I return--yield to the Chair.
    The Chair. Thank you. I don't see Senator Lummis here or 
online, but if she does arrive and wants to give us opening 
statement as the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee, we will 
definitely look forward to hearing her comments. We will now 
turn to the witnesses. I want to welcome Dr. Nancy Albritton, 
Dean of the College of Engineering at the University of 
Washington, the Frank and Julie Jungers Dean.
    I also want to welcome Dr. Jack Clark, Co-Founder of 
Anthropic; Mr. William Breckenridge III, Director of High 
Performance Computing and High Performance Computing 
Collaborative, Mississippi State University; Mr. Steve Lupien 
is joining us remotely. He is the Director of the Center for 
Blockchain and Digital Initiatives at the University of Wyoming 
College of Business.
    Dr. Bob--is at Suter? Sutor--Dr. Bob Sutor, Vice President, 
Corporate Development of ColdQuanta; and Dr. Henry Jones, 
Director of Research and Development in Scientific 
Entrepreneurship, University of Southern Mississippi. So 
welcome to all of you. We will start with you, Dean Albritton.

  STATEMENT OF NANCY ALBRITTON, M.D., Ph.D., FRANK AND JULIE 
    JUNGERS DEAN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING DEAN, UNIVERSITY OF 
                           WASHINGTON

    Dr. Albritton. Good morning, Chairman Cantwell and Ranking 
Member Wicker, and distinguished members of the Committee. 
Thank you, Senator Cantwell, my Senator, for the opportunity to 
testify about the value and continued importance of our Nation 
investing in emerging computing technologies.
    As noted, I am the Dean of the University of Washington 
College of Engineering, and the three technologies the 
Committee is focusing on today are areas where the University 
of Washington is making significant contributions. Indeed, our 
faculty lead multiple large, multi-institutional national 
science foundation awards to advance the potential of AI, 
machine learning, and data science, all while training the next 
generation of workers and innovators.
    As we have already noted, Congress took a bold step with 
the CHIPS and Science Act. I am encouraged by this step. A 
sustained Federal investment in these programs is essential for 
our Nation to maintain its leadership on this fierce global 
landscape. But it is also important to leverage collaborative 
opportunities between Government, academia, and industry, and 
to build a workforce that reflects the rich diversity of our 
Nation.
    This morning, I will focus my comments on the impact of 
investment in quantum information science. Starting with an 
example and its promise. As we all know, Hurricane Ian has made 
landfall in our Southern States, and as noted, I am a native of 
Louisiana. I keenly understand the toll that hurricanes have on 
a community and also the hardship of rebuilding.
    Thankfully, though, forecasting models developed by NOAA, 
NASA, and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory help us 
predict the path and intensity of these hurricanes. It is a 
tremendous improvement from my childhood, but just imagine if 
we could prepare for storms with a much higher degree of 
certainty.
    Theoretically, a full scale quantum computer can weather--
perform weather forecasting with high accuracy by handling vast 
amounts of data in seconds, saving lives and reducing property 
damage. In the 1980s, classical computing and personal 
computers changed the world. But now, advances in quantum 
information science promise major breakthroughs in 
communications, computing, and simulation.
    Just as quantum science has enabled groundbreaking 
technologies such as GPS, MRI, lasers for health care 
applications, the realization of quantum information science 
will fundamentally change the way that we live and work. But 
now is the time to accelerate Federal investment to maintain a 
competitive edge.
    Across the globe, growing numbers of universities, 
including the University of Washington, have established major 
quantum information programs, and the competition for students, 
researchers, faculty, and funding is intense, as is industry 
hiring. The new quantum information initiatives in the U.S. and 
around the world all have the same goal, not to miss this 
window to lead in this area.
    But no country is better positioned to emerge in the top 
cohort than the U.S. is with its partnerships between academia, 
Government, and industry. At the University of Washington, 
though, the lack of critical quantum information science 
capabilities, particularly those associated with the large cost 
of implementation and maintenance, hampers our impact in this 
growing field.
    Another challenge to industry growth is the shortage of 
equipped and diverse workforce. It is already difficult to fill 
skilled STEM job openings, and as quantum computing investments 
grow, competition for skilled worker intensifies and is an 
unsustainable demand.
    At the University of Washington alone, student demand far 
exceeds capacity and most of our STEM programs, forcing us to 
turn away excellent students when our Nation demands a skilled 
workforce.
    America's research universities stand ready to partner with 
you to provide leadership, research, and workforce education. I 
ask that you continue to sustain and increase Federal funding, 
particularly in those science agencies that will enable us to 
remain a global quantum information leader.
    But more specifically, increase Federal investment in 
workforce development and education, and accessible quantum 
testbeds and quantum cloud computing, and high risk engineering 
and science research and more fundamental quantum information 
research, but also an investment in technology policy will be 
particularly impactful.
    Thank you for your time and consideration. I welcome your 
questions.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Albritton follows:]

  Prepared Statement of Nancy Albritton, M.D., Ph.D., Frank and Julie 
   Jungers Dean College of Engineering Dean, University of Washington
    Good morning, Chairman Cantwell and Ranking Member Wicker, and 
distinguished Members of the Committee. Thank you, Senator Cantwell, my 
Senator, for the opportunity to testify about the value and continued 
importance of our Nation investing in emerging computing technologies. 
I am the Dean of the University of Washington (UW) College of 
Engineering, and the three technologies the committee is focusing on 
today--artificial intelligence (AI), quantum information science (QIS), 
and distributed ledger technologies (DLT)--are areas where the 
University of Washington is making significant contributions and 
leading nationally and internationally to develop and discover the 
potential of these fields while training the next generation of workers 
and innovators.
    Earlier this year Congress took a bold step to ensure that the 
United States is equipped to be a global leader in science and 
innovation with the passing of the CHIPS and Science Act. As you know, 
this legislation is designed to revitalize American science and 
innovation, build a strong and diverse STEM workforce, create solutions 
for the climate crisis, and support American manufacturing. As a leader 
in academia, I am encouraged by this critical Federal funding, and I am 
here today to urge you to continue to invest in our Federal science 
agencies and initiatives empowered by CHIPS. Sustained Federal 
investment in these programs are essential for our Nation to remain a 
leader in a fierce global landscape, to leverage opportunities for 
collaboration between government, academic, and business sectors, and 
to build a workforce that reflects the rich diversity of our Nation.
    The University of Washington has significant expertise in the three 
areas that the committee is focusing on today. UW faculty serve as PIs 
on multiple large, multi-institution NSF awards in artificial 
intelligence, machine learning, and data science, including the 
Institute for Foundations in Data Science, the Institute for 
Foundations in Machine Learning, and the AI Institute for Dynamic 
Systems. However, this morning I will focus my comments on the impact 
of investing in quantum information science and I'll start with an 
example of its promise. As I write, Hurricane Ian is strengthening 
before making landfall in our southern states and coastlines, with the 
potential to shatter communities. As a native of Louisiana, I keenly 
understand the toll that a destructive hurricane can have on a 
community and the hardship of rebuilding. Thankfully, forecasting 
models help us predict the path and intensity of hurricanes. Large 
supercomputers and artificial intelligence already aid forecasting, 
such as models developed by NOAA, NASA and the Pacific Northwest 
National Laboratory (PNNL) that can predict when hurricanes will 
rapidly intensify. It is a tremendous improvement from when I was 
growing up, but we can and should do more. However, to achieve greater 
accuracy in weather forecasting, more computational power is needed.
    Theoretically, a full-scale quantum computer can improve weather 
forecasting methods by handling huge amounts of data (terabytes per 
second) containing many variables and optimizing complex algorithms, 
and can do so in seconds. With quantum computing, we will be able to 
prepare for these storms with a much higher level of certainty, 
potentially saving lives and reducing property damage.
    Our society stands on the brink of a major revolution driven by 
quantum information science with boundless potential to fundamentally 
change the way we live and work. Quantum information science uses 
quantum effects to acquire, transmit, and process information. Quantum 
science has already enabled us to better understand nature and advance 
groundbreaking technologies like GPS, MRI scans, and lasers for 
healthcare applications such as eye surgery and joint surgery.
    Like the 1980s when classical computing and the personal computer 
changed the world, recent advances in quantum information science 
promise major breakthroughs in communications, computing, and 
simulation. Industry and governments around the world are investing 
heavily in quantum information science, recognizing its potential and 
poising to capitalize on it. As the U.S. aims to be a scientific leader 
of the coming quantum information age, now is the time to accelerate 
Federal investment, as outlined by CHIPS, so our Nation is a global 
leader in this field.
    Currently, there are growing numbers of universities with 
established major quantum information programs in the world, and the 
University of Washington is proud to be one such program with robust 
partnerships with industry including Microsoft, Boeing, Google, and 
Amazon, and with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). 
Internationally, quantum information programs are underway in Sweden 
(WACQT), the Netherlands (Quantum Delta), Japan (Moonshot), Israel 
(Israel National Quantum Initiative), and the U.K. (UKNQTP). Germany, 
France, Austria, and Canada are also substantially investing in this 
area. China is making massive investments in quantum computing, and 
quantum technology more broadly, making it certain that they will 
emerge as a leader in this area in the next decade. Worldwide, the 
competition for top students, researchers, faculty, and funding is 
fierce, as is hiring by companies. The new quantum information 
initiatives in the U.S. and around the world have the same goal: not to 
miss the window to lead in this area. No country is better positioned 
to emerge in the top cohort than the U.S. in partnership with academia, 
government, and industry.
    Investment in America's leading research universities will allow 
talented faculty and students to further innovative science that will 
elevate the U.S. as a global destination for knowledge and discovery in 
quantum information sciences. These foundational investments will 
influence economic and national security, prepare U.S. students for 
jobs with quantum information technology, enhance STEM education at all 
levels, and accelerate exploration of quantum information frontiers, 
all while expanding and diversifying the talent pool for the industries 
of the future in Washington state and across the Nation.
    For example, the Washington Quantum Technologies, Teaching and 
Testbed Laboratory (QT3) provides a regional resource for hands-on 
quantum technology training to the next generation of quantum 
scientists and engineers and state-of-the art quantum device 
characterization research tools in a publicly accessible user facility.
    In this second quantum revolution, society will leverage the 
quantum-mechanical properties of light and matter to enable new 
technologies in computation, communication, and sensing. Federal 
funding to enable universities to train the next generation of 
scientists and engineers is needed to enable this revolution. To 
realize practical quantum technologies, quantum expertise is needed 
through the full quantum stack--from materials, devices and hardware to 
software and algorithms. DOE NQI centers have been established to drive 
forward the research and training in select laboratories. These 
centers, however, do not address the need for shared quantum 
infrastructure for training and testbeds where Federal funding would 
serve a critical need.
    At the University of Washington, the lack of critical capabilities, 
primarily originating from the large cost of implementing and 
maintaining them, hampers our impact. While we have targeted systems 
that work at room temperature, the leading quantum computing platforms 
work at ultra-low temperatures, just a fraction of a degree above 
absolute zero. Our researchers and students need access to this 
capability. We are able to provide our current capabilities by focusing 
on a single qubit platform which can function at room temperature at 
one particular energy. This particular platform at room temperature 
cannot scale to the many qubits required for meaningful quantum 
computation. We also need to seek to expand to enable the excitation 
and detection capabilities to discover new qubits which have the 
potential to scale even further.
    The Boston Consulting Group estimates that quantum computing alone 
could create a value of $450 billion to $850 billion in the next 15 to 
30 years if the technology scales as fast as predicted \1\. Quantum 
information science presents a tremendous economic opportunity and a 
substantial hurdle. One of the biggest issues impeding the growth of 
this industry is the shortage of an equipped quantum information 
science workforce. This shortage has a significant impact on the future 
growth of industry. In Washington state workforce development will 
impact the recruitment to existing Washington companies who have 
expanding footprints in quantum computing including Microsoft, Boeing, 
Amazon and Google as well as to new start-ups. It is increasingly 
difficult to fill skilled STEM job openings, which is further 
compounded for companies where advanced degrees in physics, chemistry, 
materials science, engineering and computer science are needed. As the 
investment and interest in quantum computing grows, competition for 
skilled workers is intensifying and creating an unsustainable demand. 
This demand cannot be addressed without an accelerated and unrelenting 
investment in training and development.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Jean-Francois Bobier, Matt Langione, Edward Tao, and Antoine 
Gourevitch, ``What Happens When `If' Turns to When in Quantum 
Computing,'' Boston Consulting Group, 2021, https://web-assets.bcg.com/
89/00/d2d074424a6ca820b1238e24ccc0/bcg-what-happens-when-if-turns-to-
when
-in-quantum-computing-jul-2021-r.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    According to a recent report from the Washington Roundtable, a 
nonprofit organization comprised of executives of major private sector 
employers in Washington state, in the next five years ``Washington 
state's anticipated annual job growth rate of 2.3 percent will far 
outpace the national rate of 1.3 percent. Seventy percent of these jobs 
will require a post-high school credential. Washington employers want 
to hire local talent to fill these positions whenever possible and it's 
essential that our young people are ready.'' \2\ At the University of 
Washington alone, student demand far exceeds capacity in the UW's 
engineering and natural sciences (including computer science and 
engineering, mathematical, physical and life sciences) programs. We are 
forced to turn away excellent students while our Nation demands a 
skilled workforce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Washington Roundtable, January 2022, https://
www.waroundtable.com/wp-content/uploads
/2022/02/WRT_PostsecondaryEnrollmentCrisis_Report_1.2022.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Failing to prepare our citizens for the innovation economy 
compromises our Nation's long-term competitiveness and economic 
stability and disadvantages our citizens and communities. Industry, 
government and universities must step up and invest in the quantum 
workforce. As we enter an increasingly specialized economy, America's 
leading research universities, including the University of Washington, 
are uniquely poised to provide leadership, research, and workforce 
education to meet this need, but we need Federal investment.
    To be competitive we need to educate the workforce of the future 
and we know diverse teams lead to better results, so we are investing 
in programs to expand access to more Washington students, as well as 
asking for investment from the state. Students from low-income 
backgrounds, underserved public high schools, as well as first-
generation college students, are particularly likely to suffer from 
financial, social, and emotional challenges, and struggle to adjust to 
college life and expectations. Our goal is to grow the infrastructure 
needed to support these students, many of whom arrive with little 
background or outside support necessary to navigate the rigorous 
coursework required for engineering and computer science. We measure 
our success in the students who graduate and move on to thriving 
careers in our Nation's industries. Central to our public mission, we 
strive to identify these students, recruit them, and enable them to 
succeed.
    STEM creates a future of opportunity. It's a pipeline of local 
talent that will serve students, businesses, and communities across the 
nation, with benefits for decades. Through key relationships with 
industry, government, and academic partners, our Nation's universities 
can connect the best and brightest minds to advance quantum technology 
faster. The success of quantum information is closely aligned to 
ongoing fundamental science, which is why Federal investment is 
required. Federal leadership and investment are the foundation for 
these advances for all. As a representative of academia, we stand ready 
to partner with you. I ask that you continue to accelerate discovery 
through sustained and increased funding of the Federal agencies that 
enable us to remain a quantum information leader in a fierce global 
landscape. And I leave you with five areas where Federal investment 
would be particularly impactful: Increased funding for workforce 
development and education, support to develop accessible quantum 
testbeds and quantum cloud computing for all, increased funding for 
high-risk engineering and science research given the remaining 
technological barriers for quantum information science to become 
broadly usable, and more fundamental quantum information research and 
investment in technology policy.
    Thank you for your time and consideration.

    The Chair. Thank you, Dr. Albritton. And we look forward to 
asking you questions on that. And now we welcome Mr. Clark.

        STATEMENT OF JACK CLARK, CO-FOUNDER, ANTHROPIC, 
   CO-CHAIR, AI INDEX, MEMBER, NATIONAL AI ADVISORY COMMITTEE

    Mr. Clark. Chair Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker, and 
members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify 
today, and thank you for passing the CHIPS and Science Act. 
Your work is helping to set the United States up for continued 
leadership in the development of transformative technologies 
such as artificial intelligence.
    For this testimony, I will make recommendations to help the 
U.S. meet the challenge of international competition, ensure 
better collaboration between industry, Government, and 
academia, and grow a diverse workforce to meet the needs of our 
economy, all while ensuring the safe and responsible adoption 
of AI.
    My recommendations are first, the U.S. should fully deliver 
the CHIPS and Science Act and make further investments in the 
measurement and monitoring of AI, both here and abroad. We need 
to know if we are in the lead, and if not, who is.
    Second, the U.S. should build experimental infrastructure 
for the development and testing of AI systems by academic and 
Government's users, and so should be ambitious in how it 
supports the proposed National AI Research Resource. And third, 
we must prioritize the creation of testbeds for AI across the 
country, which can be used to train a new, diverse workforce in 
the art of assessing and deploying AI systems.
    The U.S. today enjoys an enviable position in AI. We have a 
strong academic base, thriving commercial sector, and this 
hearing is an example, a Government that cares about how to 
support the industry.
    AI systems have already made it out of the lab and are 
being used in the world. GitHub, a subsidiary of Microsoft, 
recently developed a tool called ``Copilot,'' a spell checker 
for code. It helps programmers program better, and those that 
use Copilot are 50 percent faster than those that don't.
    Researchers at Stanford have combined satellite imagery and 
machine learning to measure sustainable development outcomes in 
areas such as hunger relief, population density, and economic 
activity. And meanwhile, Google researchers have built 
translation technology for languages for which there is scarce 
data.
    And using this, they have added 24 new languages to their 
translate service, letting all of us talk more to each other. 
And further afield, a new class of AI systems called Foundation 
Models are giving us the AI equivalent of Swiss Army knives, 
single software applications that can perform a multitude of 
tasks ranging from generating text and code, to helping people 
to create images and songs, to summarizing vast documents such 
as legislation.
    But the U.S. can't rest on its laurels. AI is a competitive 
technology, and China already rivals for U.S. in AI R&D. In 
2021, China published more AI research papers from the United 
States and filed more patents than any other country. The U.S. 
still holds the lead in the number of accepted papers and also 
in the number of citations its papers get but the gap is 
closing.
    China has also proved capable of significant feats of AI 
engineering and research. Chinese scientists have won image 
recognition challenges, which were previously dominated by 
American companies. And Chinese companies like Huawei have been 
the first entities to publicly replicate frontier research 
published by American companies. So what do we do? I have two 
specific proposals.
    As someone who spends their days in an AI lab, I can tell 
you that testing and evaluating AI systems is fundamental to 
realizing that commercial applications and identifying any 
safety issues.
    Therefore, we must ensure that the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology is able to stand up AI testbeds across 
America so local communities can take AI systems out of the lab 
and vigorously test and deploy them. Second, we need better 
experimental infrastructure, here, big computers, because that 
is fundamental for research. For that reason, I wholeheartedly 
support the National AI Research Resource.
    If we want America to benefit from AI, then we need to make 
it easier for our Nation's best scientists to build and 
experiment on it. And that is an opportunity the NAIRR gives 
us. In closing, the U.S. remains in a strong leadership 
position in the AI ecosystem, but China continues to close the 
gap.
    For the U.S. to maintain its leadership, it should ensure 
adequate funding for AI research, computational infrastructure, 
and support for the measurement and assessment of AI systems. 
Ensuring strong domestic AI capabilities is paramount to 
protect our national security interests and ensure our 
continued economic competitiveness.
    And Senators, I used an AI to write the last few sentences 
of this testimony. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Clark follows:]

 Prepared Statement of Jack Clark, Co-founder, Anthropic, Co-chair, AI 
             Index, Member, National AI Advisory Committee
How testing and experimental infrastructure will let the United States 
        take advantage of the industrialization of AI.
    Chair Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker, and members of the 
committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today about 
the important topic of how the United States can maintain its 
leadership in emerging compute technologies. First, thank you for 
passing the CHIPs and Science Act. Through passing this, you have 
helped to set the United States of America up for continued leadership 
in the development and deployment of transformative technologies such 
as artificial intelligence.
    For this testimony, I will make a few simple recommendations, which 
I hope will help us meet the challenge of international competition; 
increase opportunities for collaboration between the government, 
industry, and business sectors; and build a diverse and inclusive 
workforce to meet the growing demands of our evolving economy--all 
while ensuring the safe and responsible adoption of technology.
    These recommendations are as follows:

   The United States should fully fund the CHIPS and Science 
        Act, and make further investments in the measurement and 
        monitoring of the artificial intelligence development ecosystem 
        both domestically and abroad. Having accurate information about 
        progress within the United States, among our allies, as well as 
        progress occurring in other countries, is crucial for making 
        good decisions about American technology strategy. We need to 
        know if we're in the lead or if we're coming from behind, and 
        where any gaps may be.

   The United States should seek to develop experimental 
        infrastructure at scale for the development and testing of 
        artificial intelligence systems by academic and government 
        users. Concretely, the proposed National AI Research Resource 
        can be best leveraged by pairing it with the creation of 
        testbeds which can be used to train a new, diverse workforce in 
        the important work of developing and assessing AI systems for 
        economic applications and safety assurance.

   The United States should prioritize the development of 
        resources for the assurance of AI--specifically, tools for the 
        testing, evaluation, and benchmarking of artificial 
        intelligence systems. The better we get at AI assurance, the 
        more confidence we can have in AI systems, and the more we can 
        create opportunities for collaboration across the private 
        sector, government, and academia. Additionally, as more 
        communities have the ability to test out different 
        applications, they'll develop new products and services along 
        the way.

    Before I expand on these recommendations, I'd like to state why 
they're necessary, and why I'm so appreciative you are having a hearing 
about this now.
HOW WE GOT HERE
    First, I want to provide an update on just how rapidly the field 
has been advancing. The past decade has been distinguished by what we 
can think of as the industrialization of artificial intelligence; AI 
has gone from an interesting topic of research and discussion among 
researchers, to something of real economic and strategic utility.
    We can very roughly draw the ``ignition point'' for the 
industrialization of AI to 2012: this is when a team of researchers at 
the University of Toronto were able to win a highly-competitive image 
recognition competition known as ImageNet using a then-novel 
technique--taking a bunch of so-called neural networks, layering them 
on top of one another like a lasagne, and then training them on a 
significant amount of data \1\. The result was a system which set a new 
state-of-the-art on image recognition and which led to significant 
investments in AI by industrial actors here and abroad.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ ImageNet Classification with Deep Convolutional Neural 
Networks, https://papers.nips.cc/paper/2012/hash/
c399862d3b9d6b76c8436e924a68c45b-Abstract.html, 2012. One of the team 
members, Ilya Sutskever, went on to help found OpenAI, a major AI 
research company based in the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Since then, the field has notched up a few notable achievements. 
Systems like ``AlphaFold'' \2\ have revolutionized the field of protein 
structure prediction, which is a key input to scientific development. 
Other AI systems have proven better able to stabilize the plasma in 
fusion reactors than any human or previous software system \3\. 
Meanwhile, AI has begun to make its way to the consumer so quickly that 
many do not realize they're already interacting with it throughout the 
day: voice recognition systems have improved substantially, we're all 
able to search through the photos on our phones now to find pictures of 
our dogs, cats, and family members.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ AlphaFold: a solution to a 50-year-old grand challenge in 
biology, https://www.deepmind
.com/blog/alphafold-a-solution-to-a-50-year-old-grand-challenge-in-
biology, 2020.
    \3\ Accelerating fusion science through learned plasma control, 
https://www.deepmind.com/blog/accelerating-fusion-science-through-
learned-plasma-control, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    These developments are fantastically exciting. Remember, ten years 
ago, none of these things were possible. Now they are. AI is now being 
applied in a vast range of fields, and we've barely scratched the 
service. Just to give you an idea of what is possible, here are a few 
examples of how AI is being applied today and the positive impact it is 
having on the world:

   Enhancing developer productivity: GitHub's Copilot product--
        an auto-completion tool used for computer programming tasks--
        has been shown to make software developers more than 50 percent 
        faster in their work than developers that do not use the tool. 
        The study also found higher levels of developer satisfaction, 
        with 60-75 percent of users feeling less frustrated by daily 
        programming tasks \4\ (GitHub).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Quantifying GitHub Copilot's impact on developer productivity 
and happiness, https://github.blog/2022-09-07-research-quantifying-
github-copilots-impact-on-developer-productivity-and-happiness/, 2022.

   Estimating sustainable development outcomes: Researchers at 
        Stanford University have demonstrated how combining satellite 
        imagery and machine learning can help measure sustainable 
        development outcomes in areas such as hunger relief, population 
        density, and economic activity \5\ (Stanford, Science)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ Using satellite imagery to understand and promote sustainable 
development, https://www
.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abe8628?cookieSet=1, 2021.

   Measuring agricultural health: Academic researchers have 
        developed an image recognition system for detecting 
        agricultural diseases in the cassava plant (a critical food 
        source for millions of people across Africa), using just a 
        mobile device \6\ (arXiv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ See: Using Transfer Learning for Image-Based Cassava Disease 
Detection, https://arxiv
.org/abs/1707.03717, 2017.

   Low-resource language translation: Google researchers have 
        found a way to develop translation technology for 
        underrepresented languages using only text in the original 
        language (traditional machine translation systems typically 
        work with two sets of text: the original language text, and its 
        translation to the target language). Using this new approach, 
        Google was able to add 24 under-resourced languages to its 
        Translate service and develop a repeatable method to include 
        other languages from around the globe \7\ (Google Research, 
        arXiv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ See: Building Machine Translation Systems for the Next Thousand 
Languages, https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.03983, 2022.

    There are also exciting developments at the frontier; in the past 
few years, so-called ``Foundation Models'' \8\ have emerged which show 
how AI is moving from an era of dedicated and specific tools to models 
that behave more like ``Swiss Army knives''--a single model will be 
able to do a broad range of tasks, many of which are scientifically and 
economically useful.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models, https://
fsi.stanford.edu/publication/opportunities-and-risks-foundation-models, 
2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    These models are distinguished by the sizes of their datasets 
(extremely large datasets, ranging from hundreds of thousands of audio 
samples \9\, to hundreds of millions of images \10\, to billions of 
text documents \11\), the amount of computation required to train them 
(hundreds to thousands of specialized AI-training computer chips, 
running for months), to the complexity of the neural networks (which 
now number in the tens to hundreds of billions of parameters). 
Foundation Models have already proven to be useful: they can write and 
compose code, edit text, produce images, edit images, summarize 
documents, form the basis of question-and-answer systems, serve as 
potentially useful educational tools, and more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ Introducing Whisper, https://openai.com/blog/whisper/, 2022.
    \10\ Revisiting Unreasonable Effectiveness of Data in Deep Learning 
Era, https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.02968, 2017.
    \11\ An empirical analysis of compute-optimal large language model 
training, https://www
.deepmind.com/publications/an-empirical-analysis-of-compute-optimal-
large-language-model-training, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    However, the frontier is expensive: it costs millions to tens of 
millions of dollars to train these models and therefore they are being 
developed by only a small set of predominantly private sector actors. A 
challenge we must overcome is how to broaden the experimental 
infrastructure necessary to investigate these models, so that more 
Americans can participate in the development and analysis of them, and 
also learn the engineering and research skills they require.
    These examples illustrate how broad the effects of the 
industrialization of AI are. But if we want to capture all the upside 
of this technology and mitigate its downsides, we also need to think 
about policies and investments that can support the burgeoning 
ecosystem, and assure the safety and reliability of the systems being 
developed within it.
WHY TESTBEDS, DATASETS, AND EVALUATION UNLOCK AI
    INNOVATION
    While there are many reasons to be optimistic about the potential 
opportunities afforded by AI, there are also well-documented risks \12\ 
and biases \13\ inherent in many of today's applications. These risks 
and biases make it harder to deploy safe AI systems, and because these 
risks and biases are hard to identify, they can also lead to AI systems 
being deployed which have inequitable or harmful behaviors. However, we 
can mitigate these issues through pre-deployment and post-deployment 
testing, both of which the government can support--specifically, via 
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ The Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence: Forecasting, 
Prevention, and Mitigation, https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07228, 2018.
    \13\ What Do We Do About the Biases in AI?, https://hbr.org/2019/
10/what-do-we-do-about-the-biases-in-ai, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To maximize the potential of AI technologies, one important role 
the government can play is in developing a robust ecosystem for AI 
assurance. An assurance ecosystem allows multiple stakeholders to 
assess AI systems for performance and safety through a combination of 
shared testbeds, datasets, and evaluations. System assurance provides 
model developers with certainty in the reliability of their models, end 
users with trust that models will act as intended, and government 
stakeholders with confidence that systems are safe for the general 
public. We can imagine this assurance ecosystem as being analogous to 
how product safety standards give consumers confidence in things 
ranging from cars, to food, to drugs. It's definitely time to build out 
this ecosystem for AI.
    Beyond improving the safety and reliability of AI systems, shared 
testbeds and evaluations enable a stronger R&D environment. Generally 
speaking, whenever a set of researchers create an artificial 
intelligence model, they then run that model through a large-scale 
battery of tests to assess model performance against previous 
iterations, as well as other results in the public domain. External 
benchmarks provide an objective, baseline measure from which developers 
can compare and improve their systems.
    At the same time, sometimes models are found to have capabilities 
that their developers did not anticipate, typically through end-users 
running novel or unexpected tests.\14\ These tests can reveal both new 
capabilities as well as safety issues--for example, when GPT-3 was 
released, external users discovered that the system was able to perform 
some basic computer programming tasks as well as text-based tasks. 
Similarly, a few years ago, external researchers discovered that 
commercially deployed facial recognition systems displayed harmful 
biases, via a study named ``Gender Shades''.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Predictability and Surprise in Large Generative Models, 
https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.07785, pg 4, 2022
    \15\ Gender Shades, https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/gender-
shades/overview/, 2022
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We already have examples of how these kinds of testing 
methodologies can be operationalized; following the publication of 
Gender Shades, NIST significantly updated its Facial Recognition Vendor 
Test (FRVT)\16\ to include fine-grained, granular evaluations which 
were also sensitive to the demographic makeup of potential end-users of 
the system. This highlights how you can operationalize testing in a way 
that improves both the safety of the system (by reducing the likelihood 
of deploying unfair systems), and also giving confidence to end-users 
of the system that it is going to perform well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ Ongoing Face Recognition Vendor Test (FRVT), 36th edition of 
the report, https://pages.nist.gov/frvt/reports/11/frvt_11_report.pdf, 
2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Given the passage of the CHIPs Act and the funding it seeks to 
allocate to NIST, we should consider all the ways NIST can play an 
expanded role here. What might it look like to identify areas where 
industry and academia would benefit from more robust tests and to seek 
to create them? How might NIST construct fact-finding teams to identify 
some of the areas of greatest ``evaluation need'' and create tests in 
response? And can we take the in-development NIST AI Risk Management 
Framework (RMF) \17\ and identify specific evaluation methodologies or 
tests that we might invest further in, so as to unlock even more 
economic innovation and increase the safety of such systems? (In my day 
job at the AI research company I am a co-founder of, Anthropic, I spend 
a lot of time trying to better evaluate our systems, and I can tell you 
that we generally try to incorporate all the tests that exist outside 
of Anthropic into our testing framework. We really can't get enough of 
them.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ NIST, AI RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK, https://www.nist.gov/itl/
ai-risk-management-framework, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    These examples highlight the value of testing for both economic 
expansion, as well as improving the safety and reliability of AI 
systems.
WHERE OTHER NATIONS ARE
    AI research and development is global. Most data sources tell us 
that, outside America, other key countries for AI R&D include the 
United Kingdom and, most pertinently for the field of international 
competition, China.
    China and the U.S. can, in many ways, now be considered at roughly 
the same point in AI development. Both countries approach the 
development of the technology with different strengths and weaknesses 
that stem from their differing political structures, but both host 
burgeoning ecosystems of commercial AI companies, and both are 
supported by strong academic research infrastructure. The data bears 
this out:

   For example, while the U.S. leads in the number of global AI 
        research paper conference citations each year (30 percent, over 
        15 percent from China in 2021), China continues to lead the 
        world in the total number of AI publications (journal, 
        conference, repository combined), with over 60 percent more 
        than the United States in 2021 (2022 AI Index)

   As it relates to patents on AI technologies, China now files 
        over half of the world's patents (51 percent in 2021). The U.S. 
        still leads the percentage of granted AI patents globally, but 
        that percentage has, on average, decreased over the past 7 
        years while the percentage of granted patents from China has 
        steadily increased (2022 AI Index).

    Beyond the basic metrics of academic publication, there are some 
qualitative examples I can share that illustrate how China has begun to 
advance its research and development of artificial intelligence.
    ImageNet: Chinese teams became increasingly competitive at the 
aforementioned ``ImageNet competition'' in the 2010s. One Chinese team 
even won an image recognition challenge within that competition several 
years ago \18\. This is an extraordinarily competitive competition and 
being in the top-3 placed teams was typically considered impressive, 
and winning it is a proxy signal for competence. Put plainly: you win 
ImageNet by being extraordinarily good at training image recognition 
systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge 2016 (ILSVRC2016), 
https://www.image-net.org/challenges/LSVRC/2016/results.php, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    GPT-3: In 2020, an American AI research company called OpenAI (I 
worked there at the time) published a paper on a system called GPT-3. 
This system was a so-called large language model (LLM). LLMs are 
interesting to AI researchers because they are generic AI systems, 
capable of classifying and generating arbitrary text, and performing a 
broad range of tasks. LLMs are also distinguished by their cost: GPT-3 
cost a lot of money to train, and involved using a large number of 
training accelerators (in this case, graphical processing units) to 
train a single neural network model; it could be considered a frontier 
capability due to this expense and complexity.
    After publishing the paper about GPT-3 in May 2020 \19\, the first 
public replication of the system arrived in a paper in April 2021. The 
replication was a system called Pan-Gu and was developed by the Chinese 
telecommunications company Huawei \20\. Other replications followed 
(HyperCLOVA from Naver in Korea, and after that Jurassic-1-Jumbo from 
AI21 Labs in Israel). Notably, two more replications from Chinese labs 
followed in Huawei's footsteps, and this year a research group linked 
to Tsinghua University released GLM-130B, a GPT-3-style language model 
which is currently the best-performing language model \21\ available as 
open source--and it's made in China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\ Language Models are Few-Shot Learners, https://arxiv.org/abs/
2005.14165, May 2020.
    \20\ PanGu-α: Large-scale Autoregressive Pretrained Chinese 
Language Models with Auto-parallel Computation, https://arxiv.org/abs/
2104.12369, April 2021.
    \21\ For a detailed breakdown of performance, please refer to this 
GitHub page for the model: https://github.com/THUDM/GLM-130B, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Re-identification surveillance: China is far ahead of the United 
States in the development of surveillance technology. Specifically, we 
can look at re-identification; the task of identifying a person in 
security camera footage, then being able to see that person via a 
different security camera posed at a different angle and use a machine 
learning system to figure out it is the same person. This is a powerful 
and chilling capability which violates the norms and privacy 
protections we have in the United States. However, just because we 
wouldn't necessarily adopt a technology ourselves, it's worth noting 
when someone else is ahead on a given capability, no matter how 
distasteful. In re-identification, recent research shows that Chinese 
teams have continually pushed forward the state of the art, and are 
responsible for 58 percent of the top papers in the field \22\. Re-
identification requires a combination of large datasets, the 
development of large-scale neural networks, and creative algorithm 
design. In other words, being good at re-identification means that 
you've built a decent AI competency, and it's worth noting that China 
is ahead here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\ Measuring AI Development A Prototype Methodology to Inform 
Policy, https://cset.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/Measuring-AI-
Development.pdf, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HOW THE UNITED STATES CAN SOLIDIFY AI LEADERSHIP
    Besides continuing to invest aggressively in fundamental research, 
the United States has a couple of strategic policy investments it can 
make to bolster its leadership in artificial intelligence. I've already 
discussed the importance of making investments in testbeds, datasets, 
and evaluation to further unleash U.S. innovation here.
    An additional lever we can use is the provisioning of experimental 
infrastructure for our academic community. Specifically, we should make 
it easier for America's best academic researchers to access 
computational power close to that found in industry, so that our 
universities can carry out ambitious experiments near the frontier of 
AI research; while it's likely industry will continue to define the 
frontier due to the increasingly large-scale resources being invested 
in model training, we should ensure academia is able to conduct 
experiments sufficiently close to it that they can help with the 
important work of safety validation and analysis of cutting-edge 
systems. This provides both accountability for the private sector, as 
well as letting our academic researchers design tools and techniques to 
improve systems deployed in the economy. We also need the necessary 
infrastructure to build testbeds for these systems so more people can 
spend time working out how to unlock their economic opportunities, and 
we can use these testbeds to include a much broader group in the 
testing and development of AI, which should help us grow the future AI 
workforce.
    For this reason, Anthropic firmly supports the goals of the 
National AI Research Resource (``NAIRR'')\23\--a shared, public 
research infrastructure for academic researchers. We view its 
establishment as a necessary and excellent long-term investment in 
American AI research, as well as a critical resource for supporting the 
training and testing of AI systems. Increasing academic access to the 
infrastructure necessary to train increasingly resource-intensive 
models will build on the long and successful collaboration between 
academia and the U.S. government in creating transformative 
technologies and advancements across the U.S. economy. (We should also 
note that other parts of science already build large-scale experimental 
infrastructure, such as the particle physics community.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\ THE NATIONAL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH RESOURCE TASK 
FORCE (NAIRRTF), https://www.ai.gov/nairrtf/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From the 1960s until 2010, research shows that academia represented 
the majority of large-scale AI experiments. Between the early 2010s and 
today, the level of compute required for the largest scale experiments 
has increased by more than 300,000x--and the industry-academic balance 
has altered, with the vast majority of large-scale results now being 
carried out by industry rather than academia \24\. Few academics can 
afford the computing and engineering costs required to build and study 
large-scale AI models, such as Foundation Models which can cost 
millions of dollars to develop, and this is preventing some of our best 
researchers from working on problems found at the frontier. Even in 
Canada, where the country's advanced research computing (ARC) platform 
has allocated increasing quantities of compute to academics since the 
mid-2010s, the number of new applications for compute by Canadian 
researchers has grown at >10 percent a year--and demand still outstrips 
available supply.\25\ Given academia's role in evaluating the safety 
and societal impacts of new technologies, we expect resources provided 
by the NAIRR will help restore a healthy balance between American 
universities and companies in cutting-edge AI research. Testbeds and 
other programs funded by the NAIRR will enable AI safety research and 
other research agendas in the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\ Addendum: Compute used in older headline results, https://
openai.com/blog/ai-and-compute/, 2019.
    \25\ 2022 Resource Allocations Competition Results, Digital 
Resource Alliance of Canada, https://alliancecan.ca/en/services/
advanced-research-computing/accessing-resources/resource-allocation-
competitions/2022-resource-allocations-competition-results
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It's reasonable to ask why something like a NAIRR is necessary, 
given that AI is being developed and deployed by a large range of 
industry actors. After all, we might ask, isn't this a sign that the 
government should concentrate its efforts elsewhere? The answer is that 
by developing and funding a NAIRR, we're able to build infrastructure 
that will naturally serve as a proving ground for some of the ideas 
coming out of academia (and perhaps not yet mature enough to be adopted 
by industry), as well as creating infrastructure which is highly 
complementary with the testbeds NIST is tasked with building as part of 
the CHIPS and Science Act. Concretely, we might imagine the NAIRR 
serving as a resource for universities to develop large-scale AI 
systems, then we can also use the computational power of the NAIRR to 
facilitate a broad spread of universities to run testbeds to see how 
well we can turn these systems to often neglected problems; improving 
the way we manage our farms, building sensing systems to help us 
respond to natural disasters, figuring out ways to make our transport 
and logistical systems more efficient, and so on. This would also be 
directly enabling for another key aspect of CHIPS and Science--the 
NSF's new Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships directorate.
    We suspect many of the best ideas for how to harness AI are going 
to come from universities across America working to solve problems 
relevant to their own communities, giving more institutions a role in 
assuring that AI systems are safe, reliable, and well-calibrated to the 
problems they are designed to solve. Local context is vital to ensure 
tools are well-designed. AI logistics systems will best serve the Port 
of Gulfport or the Port of Seattle if local port employees and nearby 
universities help inform those systems. These tools will underperform 
if they are only pressure-tested in distant labs, rather than by 
researchers close to local contexts.
    Another example is in healthcare: AI shows significant promise to 
enhance healthcare, such as applications that aid in diagnostics or 
recommending treatments. However, due to differences between hospitals, 
such as imaging equipment, procedures, and local population 
demographics, AI algorithms that may work well at one hospital can 
perform very poorly at another. One solution to this problem involves 
more collaborations between universities and their local hospitals to 
develop, test, and fine tune models to serve regional needs, which can 
be facilitated by testbeds in combination with the NAIRR. The NAIRR can 
also help us work on some of the challenges of the governance of 
increasingly capable AI systems. By making available experimental 
infrastructure for large-scale experimentation, the NAIRR creates an 
opportunity to think about how we govern that experimental 
infrastructure. Which experiments should get authorized for using a 
large amount of NAIRR resources? \26\ How do we test and evaluate the 
systems that result from these experiments? \27\ Which people should 
participate in the analysis and curation of the datasets which are used 
to develop models on the NAIRR? Once a system is developed on the 
NAIRR, how might organizations such as NIST help assure the resulting 
system for safety? These are all extraordinarily valuable things to 
work on in public, rather than in private as is done today by most 
industry actors. Beyond enhancing economic competitiveness and safety, 
the NAIRR may also help us identify smart, lightweight regulations that 
will be fit for the increasingly powerful AI models that will 
distinguish this new period of industrialization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\ Centre for the Governance of AI Submission to the Request for 
Information (RFI) on Implementing Initial Findings and Recommendations 
of the NAIRR Task Force, https://www.governance.ai/research-paper/
submission-nairr-task-force, 2022.
    \27\ Anthropic response to Request for Information (RFI) on 
Implementing the Initial Findings and Recommendations of the National 
Artificial Intelligence Research Resource Task Force https://
www.ai.gov/rfi/2022/87-FR-31914/Anthropic-NAIRR-RFI-Response-2022.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONCLUSION
    In conclusion, I'd like to thank this committee for its important 
role in the CHIPS and Science Act, enthusiastically support full 
appropriation for its programs, and recommend that the additional 
investments that the bill proposes be made in testbeds, datasets, and 
evaluation as a means of unlocking economic innovation and unlocking 
revolutionary scientific research.
    Additionally, I want to offer strong support for the establishment 
of the National AI Research Resource, a national infrastructure built 
to facilitate academic AI research that can also help make sure the 
United States stays ahead in one of the most important technology 
developments we are seeing today. The NAIRR will ensure that American 
scientists keep our Nation at the forefront of understanding frontier 
compute technology, creating important research and workforce 
opportunities and new avenues for economic growth.
    Thank you for the chance to speak. I'll be happy to answer any 
questions you have about my testimony.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \28\ I used an Anthropic 'Foundation Model' to write the 
'CONCLUSION' section of this testimony. I added some specific language 
and tweaked a couple of words, but other than that, the text is what 
the AI generated. I hope this illustrates how these technologies are 
already changing how we work today.

    The Chair. Do you want to explain that?
    Mr. Clark. Yes. I fed the first two pages of a testimony to 
an AI language model that Anthropic developed and then it wrote 
the last paragraph. And then I added for, and Senators, part 
myself to indicate to you it was written by an AI rather than 
me.
    The Chair. And it compiled a summation from the data points 
that had previously been mentioned? What do you think the----
    Mr. Clark. It read the text and tried to predict what a 
good finishing conclusion would be. I also said, please write 
the conclusion. I tend to be polite to it as well.
    The Chair. Thank you. Mr. Breckenridge.
    Mr. Clark. Top that.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Breckenridge. Right.
    [Laughter.]

        STATEMENT OF WILLIAM B. (TREY) BRECKENRIDGE III,

              DIRECTOR, HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING

          COLLABORATORY, MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY

    Mr. Breckenridge. Chairman Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker, 
and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 
speak today about a topic that is both timely and critical to 
our Nation's global competitiveness and security. As many 
experts have highlighted, U.S. research investment has fallen 
woefully behind our adversaries in areas that are critical to 
our national security.
    The topic of this hearing are certainly at the top of the 
list if we are to sustain and protect our Nation as a world 
leader. My perspective comes as Director of the High 
Performance Computing Laboratory at Mississippi State 
University, where I have served for the past 30 years.
    Our high performance computing capacity provides support 
for research in artificial intelligence, autonomous vehicles, 
cybersecurity, data science, weather modeling, and other areas 
of applied research vital to the prosperity of the United 
States and the world.
    I am extremely proud of the national presence MSU holds in 
high performance computing and the advancement of science 
enabled by our HPC systems. Mississippi State University has 
had a presence on the world's top 500 fastest computers list 
since 1996. At its debut in 2019, our Orion supercomputer, a 
5.5 petaflops system, operated in partnership with NOAA, ranked 
60th in the world and 5th in U.S. academia.
    Much of the growth and success that Mississippi State 
University has enjoyed in high performance computing can be 
directly attributed to the partnerships we have built with 
agencies such as NOAA, NSF, Department of Agriculture's 
Agricultural Research Service, and the DOD.
    With respect to international HPC capability, according to 
the top 500 supercomputing sites list, in 2012 the U.S. was 
home to more than 50 percent of the world's 500 fastest 
computers, while China had less than 14 percent.
    Today, the U.S. is home to only 23 percent of the world's 
500 fastest computers, while China has increased their share to 
over 45 percent. Furthermore, China has significantly increased 
HPC funding to match or exceed the U.S. HPC capacity at the 
very high end.
    The fastest system on the latest top 500 list is located in 
the U.S., however many experts are confident that China has 
secretly built two systems that rival the performance of the 
fastest U.S. system. Simply put, our adversaries are 
outspending us in high performance computing. As you well know, 
artificial intelligence and blockchain rely heavily on HPC and 
the next major advance in computing will most likely occur with 
quantum technology.
    Quantum holds the potential to solve complex problems that 
are unable to be solved with classical computing systems, but 
it also presents many challenges that must be overcome with 
significant investments. As an example, in the field of 
cybersecurity, quantum technology will place much of today's 
public key encryption at risk.
    The development of robust quantum based encryption 
techniques and the use of quantum machine learning to detect 
and defeat novel cyber-attacks are crucial. These challenges 
are not just in the development and maturation of hardware, but 
perhaps more importantly, the creation and training of a 
knowledgeable workforce that is able to develop new software 
tools and enable access to the broader scientific community 
without the need for understanding quantum physics.
    The recent passage of the CHIPS and Science Act has been 
heralded as a necessary action for the United States to match 
investment in these critical technology areas that are being 
heavily funded by those in the international community looking 
to displace the U.S. as a leader in technology development and 
deployment.
    We have certainly experienced it recently with the global 
chip shortage based on China dependence and we have strong 
evidence that their investment in quantum and AI is clearly 
outpacing our investment. The CHIPS and Science Act is an 
excellent first step to combat this issue.
    I would also like to applaud the bill sections related to 
the EPSCoR funding and impacts it will have to vastly expand 
the talent base in critical fields necessary to remain a global 
leader. We have proven that EPSCoR institutions like MSU can be 
a national leader in technology fields such as high performance 
computing, contributing to the advancement of necessary 
technology, while playing a significant role in cultivating the 
workforce of tomorrow's innovative leaders.
    I offer the following recommendation for the Committee to 
consider. To remain globally competitive and protect our 
future, investments such as the CHIPS and Science sector are 
critical to maintain our national security to mitigate being 
outpaced by adversary nations whose primary goal is to relegate 
the U.S. to a second tier technology nation.
    We must utilize the expertise that exists throughout the 
U.S. and grow the technology workforce, not in just existing 
U.S. technology centers, but throughout the country. Finally, 
Federal, State, and university partnerships will be critical to 
addressing these issues and being unified in developing 
solutions.
    Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. 
Bipartisan support of technology and innovation is critical to 
our competitiveness, and Mississippi State University stands 
prepared to be full participants in support of your efforts.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Breckenridge follows:]

  Prepared Statement of William B. (Trey) Breckenridge III, Director, 
 High Performance Computing Collaboratory, Mississippi State University
    Chairman Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker and members of the 
committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak today about a topic 
that is both timely and critical to our Nation's global competitiveness 
and security. As many experts have highlighted, U.S. research 
investment has fallen woefully behind our adversaries in areas that are 
critical to our national security. The topics of this hearing are 
certainly at the top of that list if we are to sustain and protect our 
Nation as a world leader.
    My perspective comes as the Director of the High Performance 
Computing Collaboratory at Mississippi State University where I have 
served for the past 30 years. Our high performance computing capacity 
provides support for research in artificial intelligence, autonomous 
vehicles, cybersecurity, data science, weather modeling and other areas 
of applied research vital to the prosperity of the United States and 
the world. I am extremely proud of the national presence MSU holds in 
high performance computing and the advancement of science enabled by 
our HPC systems. Mississippi State University has had a presence on the 
world's TOP500 fastest computers list since 1996. At its debut in 2019 
our Orion supercomputer, a 5.5 petaFLOPS system operated in partnership 
with NOAA, ranked 60th in the world and 5th in U.S. academia. Much of 
the growth and success Mississippi State University has enjoyed in high 
performance computing can be directly attributed to the partnerships we 
have built with agencies such as NOAA, NSF, the Department of 
Agriculture's Agriculture Research Service, and the DOD.
    With respect to international HPC capability, according to the 
TOP500 Supercomputing Sites list, in 2012 the U.S. was home to more 
than 50 percent of the world's 500 fastest supercomputers while China 
had less than 14 percent. Today the U.S. is home to only 23 percent of 
the world's 500 fastest computers while China has increased their share 
to over 45 percent. Furthermore, China has significantly increased HPC 
funding to match or exceed the U.S. HPC capacity at very high end. The 
fastest system on the latest TOP500 list is located in the US, however 
many experts are confident that China has secretly built two systems 
that rival the performance of the fastest U.S. system. Simply put, our 
adversaries are outspending us in high performance computing.
    As you well know, Artificial Intelligence and Blockchain rely 
heavily on HPC, and the next major advance in computing will most 
likely occur with Quantum technology. Quantum holds the potential to 
solve complex problems that are unable to be solved with classical 
computing systems, but it also presents many challenges that must be 
overcome with significant investments. As an example, in the field of 
cybersecurity, quantum technology will place much of today's public-key 
encryption at risk. The development of robust quantum-based encryption 
techniques and the use of quantum machine learning to detect and defeat 
novel cyber-attacks are crucial. These challenges are not just in the 
development and maturation of hardware, but perhaps more importantly, 
the creation and training of a knowledgeable workforce that is able to 
develop new software tools and enable access to the broader scientific 
community without a need for understanding quantum physics.
    The recent passage of the CHIPS and Science Act has been heralded 
as a necessary action for the United States to match investment in 
these critical technology areas that are being heavily funded by those 
in the international community looking to displace the U.S. as a leader 
in technology development and deployment. We have certainly experienced 
that recently with the global chip shortage based on China dependence, 
and we have strong evidence that their investment in quantum and AI is 
clearly outpacing our investment. The CHIPS and Science Act is an 
excellent first step to combat this issue. I would also like to applaud 
the bill sections related to EPSCoR funding and the impacts it will 
have to vastly expand the talent base in the critical fields necessary 
to remain a global leader. We have proven that EPSCoR institutions like 
MSU can be a national leader in technology fields such as high 
performance computing, contributing to the advancement of necessary 
technology while playing a significant role in cultivating the 
workforce for tomorrow's innovative leaders.
    I offer the following recommendations for the committee to 
consider. To remain globally competitive and protect our future, 
investments such as the CHIPS and Science Act are critical to maintain 
our national security to mitigate being outpaced by adversary nations 
whose primary goal is to relegate the U.S. to a second-tier technology 
nation. We must utilize all the expertise that exists throughout the 
U.S. and grow the technology workforce, not just in existing U.S. 
technology centers but throughout the country. Finally, federal, state 
and university partnerships will be critical to addressing these issues 
and be unified in developing solutions.
    Chairman Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker, members of the committee, 
I thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. Bipartisan 
support of technology and innovation is critical to our competitiveness 
and Mississippi State University stands prepared to be full 
participants in support of your efforts.

    The Chair. Thank you for that testimony. We will now go 
remotely to Mr. Steve Lupien, am I saying that correctly? Hold 
on a second, Mr. Lupien. Hold on 1 second. We don't have your 
audio.
    Mr. Lupien. Can you hear me now?
    The Chair. Yes. Thank you so much. Thank you.

            STATEMENT OF STEVEN C. LUPIEN, DIRECTOR,

          UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING CENTER FOR BLOCKCHAIN

                     AND DIGITAL INNOVATION

    Mr. Lupien. Chairman Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker, and 
members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 
testify today on the topic of distributed ledger systems and 
how the U.S. can maintain our leadership in this nascent 
technology. And also thank you for passing the CHIPS and 
Science Act.
    My name is Steve Lupien. I am a Lecturer in Digital Assets 
at the University of Wyoming's College of Business and Director 
of the University's Interdisciplinary Center for Blockchain and 
Digital Innovation. I specialize in the many ways that digital 
assets are disrupting business and financial systems.
    In my educational capacity, I am often asked to explain 
what blockchains are. And simply put, they are just a new type 
of database that allows multiple people to see the same 
information at the same time and provide trust that that 
information is valid. Blockchains make data unique, and that is 
their true power.
    Data on a blockchain is immutable, encrypted, yet private, 
and allows trust to be written into code and not left to third 
party intermediaries. I have been fortunate to work directly in 
many of the forward looking regulation that Wyoming has enacted 
over the last several years. Currently, Wyoming has passed 30 
bills.
    The first is a token taxonomy bill defining digital assets 
under the law. I believe both the House and Senate are looking 
at that presently. We are the first to map digital assets to 
existing UCC law, which I think is important to give businesses 
certainty in this space. We created a FinTech sandbox to allow 
businesses to innovate under regulatory supervision.
    And probably the most important thing we did was passed 
groundbreaking legislation called the Special Purpose 
Depository Institution Bill that creates regulated banks for 
both U.S. dollar deposits and digital assets.
    Unlike many in this space, I believe that digital assets 
should be allowed to flourish under appropriate regulatory 
guardrails while allowing latitude for experimentation, 
development, and growth. I don't see digital assets as a threat 
to our existing financial and business systems, but instead as 
an enhancement that will allow the U.S. to maintain our lead in 
finance and business long into the future.
    However, the industry is receiving mixed signals from 
regulators to date, and we need to align on a comprehensive 
regulatory framework that removes any uncertainty and allows 
businesses the legal clarity they need to experiment and grow 
this technology. Digital assets can encompass much more than 
just cryptocurrency.
    They are being used for highly efficient supply chain 
tracking systems, frictionless and speedy payment systems, 
smart contracts that allow businesses to automate countless 
contractual agreements, and token--and tokenization of physical 
assets through nonfungible tokens, NFTs, that not only allow 
the tokenization of intellectual property like artwork, but 
also innovations such as ESG tokens for energy source 
identification, carbon capture, carbon sequestration, and even 
environmental habitat protection just to name a few.
    The U.S. Government has just begun to fund research 
projects in this space, and I encourage you to explore 
opportunities to partner with universities more in discovering 
how digital assets can bring about financial and business 
leadership as well as public good. Please consider the role of 
rural universities in this space.
    We are often out in front. For example, the University of 
Wyoming was the first Division 1 university to offer a degree 
program in blockchain, a minor in blockchain, the first to 
build and operate an educational Bitcoin mining lab, and the 
first to operate a proof of stake staking pool. I am also a 
very strong advocate of fostering digital literacy.
    My center recently received funding through the Wyoming 
Innovation Partnership with seed funding from the American 
Rescue Plan to develop educational programs for Wyoming's high 
schools and community colleges. The goal of these programs are 
to introduce students to the many options available to them in 
STEM in general and blockchain in particular.
    We have a secondary goal of encouraging more girls and 
women and these--to these opportunities as they are presently 
underrepresented in the workforce. And I encourage you to look 
at how programs such as these can be made nationwide.
    Just this month, the U.S. Department of Commerce published 
a report titled, Responsible Advancement of U.S. Competitive 
and Digital Assets.
    In this report, they highlighted several categories that I 
support, and I ask you to do so also, including ensuring 
effective regulatory approaches for addressing regulatory gaps, 
fostering meaningful public-private engagement to ensure that 
digital asset stakeholders across multiple business sectors and 
Federal departments and agencies can meet regularly to discuss 
important issues, and sustain leadership in technological 
research and development that will be advanced for activities 
such as increased investment in the Government, academic, and 
industry led research.
    I thank you all for your time and consideration and welcome 
any questions you have.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Lupien follows:]

Prepared Statement of Steven C. Lupien, Director, University of Wyoming 
              Center for Blockchain and Digital Innovation

               Applications of Digital Ledger Technology 
                  and How the U.S. Can Better Compete

    Chairman Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker and members of the 
committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the topic 
of Distributed Ledger Systems and how the U.S. can gain and then 
maintain our leadership in this nascent technology. My name is Steven 
Lupien, and I am a Lecturer in Digital Assets at the University of 
Wyoming's College of Business and Director of the University's 
interdisciplinary Center for Blockchain and Digital Innovation (CBDI).
    I am an expert in the many ways that digital assets are disrupting 
business and financial systems and the co-author of the textbook 
Blockchain Fundamentals for Web 3.0 published in August 2022 by the 
University of Arkansas Press: Link
    In my educational capacity, I am often asked to explain what 
blockchain are. Simply put, they are a new type of database that allows 
multiple people to see the same information at the same time and 
provide trust that the information is valid. Blockchains make data 
unique, and that is their true power. Data on a blockchain is 
immutable, encrypted yet private, and allows trust to be written in 
code, and not left to third-party intermediaries.
    I have been directly involved in much of the forward-looking 
regulation that Wyoming has enacted, currently 30 Bills since 2017, 
that include:

   The first Token Taxonomy bill defining digital assets under 
        the law,

   Mapping digital assets to existing UCC Law,

   Creating a Fintech Sandbox to allow businesses to innovate 
        under regulatory supervision, and

   The ground-breaking Special Purpose Depository Institutions 
        (SPDI) bill creating regulated banks for both U.S. dollar 
        deposits and digital assets.

    Unlike many in this space, I believe that digital assets should be 
allowed to flourish under appropriate regulatory guardrails while 
allowing the latitude for experimentation, development, and growth. I 
don't see digital assets as a threat to our existing financial and 
business systems, but instead as enhancements that will allow the U.S. 
to maintain our lead in finance and business, and as the world's 
reserve currency long into the future.
    However, the industry is receiving mixed signals from regulators to 
date, and we need to align on a comprehensive regulatory framework that 
removes any uncertainty and allows businesses the legal clarity that 
they need to experiment and grow this technology.
    Digital assets encompass much more than just ``cryptocurrency,'' 
they are being used for highly efficient supply train tracking, 
frictionless and speedy payment systems, smart contracts that allow 
businesses to automate countless contractual agreements, and the 
tokenization of physical assets through non-fungible tokens (NFT's)--
that not only allow the tokenization of intellectual property, like 
artwork, but also innovations such as ESG tokens for Energy Source 
Identification, Carbon Capture, Carbon Sequestration, and even 
environmental habitat protection, to name just a few.
    The U.S. government has been slow to fund research projects in this 
space, and I encourage you to explore opportunities to partner with 
universities in discovering how digital assets can bring about 
financial and business leadership as well as public good--please 
consider the role of rural universities in this space, we are often out 
in front. For example, the University of Wyoming was the first D-1 
university to offer a degree program in blockchain (Minor in 
Blockchain), the first to build and operate an education Bitcoin mining 
lab, and the first to operate a proof-of stake staking pool.
    I am also a very strong advocate of fostering digital literacy. My 
center recently received funding through the Wyoming Innovation 
Partnership (WIP) with seed funding from the American Rescue Plan (ARP) 
to develop education programs for Wyoming's high schools and community 
colleges. The goal of these program is to introduce students to the 
many options available to them in STEM in general and blockchain in 
particular. We have a secondary goal of introducing girls and women to 
these opportunities as they are presently underrepresented in the 
workforce. I encourage you to look at how programs such as these can be 
made available nationwide.
    The U.S. Department of Commerce published a report this month 
titled, RESPONSIBLE ADVANCEMENT OF U.S. COMPETITIVENESS IN DIGITAL 
ASSETS. In this report, they highlighted several categories that I 
support, and ask that you do also, including:

   Ensuring effective regulatory approaches and addressing 
        regulatory gaps. This will support the development of a healthy 
        market that nurtures competition and responsible innovation 
        while safeguarding consumer and investor interests, market 
        integrity, financial stability, and national security.

   Fostering meaningful public-private engagement to ensure 
        that digital asset stakeholders across multiple business 
        sectors and Federal departments and agencies can regularly meet 
        to discuss issues of import to the digital asset sector and 
        identify areas where coordination may need to occur. Please 
        include rural universities here, as well.

   Sustained leadership in technological research and 
        development (R&D) that will be advanced through activities such 
        as increased investment in government, academic, and industry-
        led research, workforce development, and digital literacy.

    I thank you all for your time and consideration and welcome any 
questions you have.

    The Chair. Thank you, Mr. Lupien. We will now turn to Dr. 
Bob Sutor. Welcome. Thank you for your presence here today.

     STATEMENT OF DR. BOB SUTOR, VICE PRESIDENT, CORPORATE 
                    DEVELOPMENT, COLDQUANTA

    Dr. Sutor. Thank you. Chairperson Cantwell, Ranking Member 
Wicker, and members of the Committee, thank you for the 
opportunity to speak to you today on behalf of the ColdQuanta 
Corporation.
    I will start with the bottom line, quantum technology and 
computing will fundamentally and profoundly change how we live 
and do business. It can significantly transform our economy, 
national security, and the daily lives of Americans. Congress 
and the White House have taken bold and important steps to 
secure our quantum future through legislation like the CHIPS 
and Science Act and the earlier National Quantum Initiative.
    We must now accelerate the development of this technology 
in parallel with building a robust domestic supply chain and 
workforce. Quantum computers are only in the early stages of 
development. The number of qubits or quantum bits that known 
quantum computers have today range from single digits to 
slightly more than 100.
    Practical quantum computers will need hundreds of thousands 
to millions of qubits for the applications we need. With 
quantum computing, we could develop new materials and 
substances, including medicines, antibiotics and antiviral 
drugs, and design new, more efficient lithium batteries for 
transportation.
    We could find new alloys for aerospace, automotive, and 
military use. I am confident we will get there. Now, if there 
is one thing we have learned repeatedly in the nearly 80 years 
of the modern computing era, computers get smaller and more 
powerful. We put computers and more of them in places we don't 
expect. Edge computing works with data close to where it is 
created or used.
    We could put quantum computers in cell phone towers and 
factories. We will want this processing capability on planes, 
ships, submarines, and even satellites. To achieve this, the 
United States must invest in scaling up the power of quantum 
systems while scaling down their size and cost for use at the 
edge.
    A data center only strategy will leave us vulnerable to not 
having the compute resources we need where we need them. 
Quantum has many other applications beyond computing, 
positioning, navigation, and timing, or PNT, concerns 
accurately locating ourselves and moving to where we need to 
be.
    News Report states that foreign powers spoof and deny GPS 
services to confuse and disadvantage their enemies at war. 
Quantum inertial sensors, including accelerometers and 
gyroscopes and quantum atomic clocks should be able to replace 
GPS, prevent spoofing, or act as a backup in case of local and 
catastrophic service failure.
    For commercial, defense, and intelligence--from commercial, 
defense, and intelligence perspectives, quantum sensors could 
provide these required, stable, and accurate measurements for 
our use on land, at sea, and in space.
    Quantum gravity sensors could assist in finding new energy 
in mining resources and detect underground facilities not 
apparent from visual examination. In what I think is a massive 
understatement, quantum is not easy. These systems require 
significant investment, scientific progress, engineering 
innovation, education, and skills development to bring into 
being. We should not wait.
    We must secure our domestic quantum supply chain for 
necessary enabling components such as lasers and photonic 
integrated circuits. Only with a reliable supply chain can the 
United States guarantee it can build the computers and sensors 
our nations need. All of this will require a significant 
quantum workforce, and it will not be limited to those with 
doctorates.
    We will need trained manufacturing and IT workers, and 
software and hardware engineers. There will be many new jobs 
and new types of jobs. We must strengthen our education in 
computer science, physics, mathematics, and engineering if we 
expect to have a national workforce with the necessary skills 
to build and use quantum tech.
    Quantum companies need support. There is currently a 
shortage of Federal assistance to help small quantum companies 
transition their promising cutting edge technology now under 
development to prototyping, and then to production, scale, and 
capability. We must strengthen and accelerate the academia, 
Government, commercial collaboration to get practical and 
pervasive quantum technologies in the next several years 
instead of the next several decades.
    We require better procedural and program mechanisms to 
navigate the so-called valley of death stage of development, 
where we have scattered investment without integration into 
deployed systems of record. We need to do more to track, 
manage, and coordinate the many individual Federal quantum R&D 
projects across the Government.
    We must ensure gaps are understood and covered, most 
promising technology is fast tracked and well-supported, and 
overlaps and duplications are removed. Thank you for the 
opportunity to speak with you.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Sutor follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Dr. Bob Sutor, Vice President, Corporate 
                     Development, ColdQuanta, Inc.
    Chairperson Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker, and Members of the 
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today on 
behalf of the ColdQuanta corporation regarding our Nation's leadership 
position in quantum computing and other emerging quantum technologies.
The bottom line
    I will start with the bottom line: quantum technology and computing 
will fundamentally and profoundly change how we live and do business. 
It has the potential to transform completely our economy, national 
security, and the daily lives of all Americans, including discovering 
new medicines, engineering better batteries, and creating many new 
jobs.
    There is a global quantum race happening. We are not the only 
country that recognizes the potential of quantum technology. If we do 
not make new strategic investments and organize more effectively at the 
Federal level to accelerate the domestic development of quantum, we 
could lose.
Science, not fiction
    Based on my experience in the quantum industry, I want to share 
with you how revolutionary quantum information science and technology 
are.
    The word ``quantum'' may conjure up thoughts of science fiction, 
with television shows such as Quantum Leap and movies like Ant-Man and 
the Wasp bringing the ``quantum realm'' into popular culture. Luckily 
for us, technologies like quantum computing, quantum inertial sensors, 
quantum radio-frequency receivers, and atomic clocks are anything but 
fiction.
    To give you a realistic example of what quantum computing is 
capable of, let's consider the field of chemistry. In this area, we 
expect to see many impactful quantum computing applications. We base 
quantum computing on the principles of quantum mechanics, which 
explains the behavior of atoms, electrons, and photons (or particles of 
light). Modeling chemical behavior at the atomic level is notoriously 
difficult and slow, and it is often necessary to sacrifice the accuracy 
of the solution to get an answer in a reasonable amount of time, even 
with massive computer resources.


    A molecule that most of us are intimately familiar with is 
caffeine. Though caffeine has a notable effect on us, it is a small and 
relatively simple molecule. Surely we should be able to model on a 
computer how caffeine operates on our brain to keep us awake and alert. 
Using a classical computer, we represent information with bits, or 
zeros and ones. However, to perfectly represent a single caffeine 
molecule in a classical computer, we estimate we would need

        10\48\ = 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

    bits of information. For comparison, scientists estimate that if 
you counted up the entirety of the atoms in the earth, every rock and 
human and molecule of air or drop of water, that number is between 
10\49\ and 10\50\.
    So to model just one caffeine molecule with a classical computer, 
we would need an amount of storage comparable to 1 to 10 percent of the 
size of the earth. We will never see this with the classical computer 
technology we use today.
The promise of quantum computing
    Quantum computing can do better. Through the quantum mechanical 
properties of ``entanglement'' and ``superposition,'' quantum computing 
promises to solve problems that classical computers could never hope to 
do in our lifetimes (or our great, great, great grandchildren's 
lifetimes). In quantum computing, we use ``qubits'' or ``quantum bits'' 
instead of bits. We expect to be able to represent caffeine using only 
160,000 qubits. With quantum computing, we could develop new medicines, 
antibiotics, and antiviral drugs and design new and much more efficient 
lithium batteries for transportation. If we could discover new 
catalysts for creating fertilizers, we could have far more sustainable 
processes supporting agriculture that use much less energy. And we 
could find new alloys and materials for aerospace, automotive, and 
military use.
    However, it is essential to note that quantum computers are in the 
early stages of development. How large are the qubit counts of quantum 
computers we know of today using public information? These range from 
single digits to slightly more than 100. In 2021, a team from the 
University of Science and Technology of China announced that they had 
built a 62-qubit computer.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://thequantuminsider.com/2021/05/10/chinese-research-team-
designs-builds-62-qubit-superconducting-quantum-computer/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Quantum computing intersects with cybersecurity because it may be 
possible someday to break several kinds of encryption methods we use 
today. A recent estimate puts the necessary qubit count for a 
successful attack at approximately 20 million.\2\ In July, the United 
States National Institute of Standards and Technology announced four 
new ``quantum-resistant'' cryptographic protocols that should withstand 
attack via future quantum computing systems.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://quantum-journal.org/papers/q-2021-04-15-433/
    \3\ https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2022/07/nist-announces-
first-four-quantum-resistant-cryptographic-algorithms
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Taking quantum to the Edge
    I believe many people make the mistake of only thinking of 
``quantum supercomputers'' living in data centers, taking up a lot of 
room, and having significant energy requirements. If there is one thing 
we have learned over and over in the nearly 80 years of the modern 
computing era, computers get smaller and more powerful. We put more of 
them in places we did not expect. Your smartphone might have been a 
supercomputer 30 or 40 years ago. We must consider computing and data 
at the Edge.


    Edge computing works with data close to where it is created or 
used. We might put a quantum computer in a cell phone tower or factory. 
We will want significant processing capabilities on planes, ships, 
submarines, and perhaps even satellites. We cannot always bring 
information back into a data center.
    In military situations, we may not be connected to centralized 
computing resources. We expect to use quantum computers for AI and 
optimization problems like logistics. One of the areas of great 
interest at the Edge is federated or distributed machine learning for 
AI applications.
    The United States must invest in scaling up the power of quantum 
systems while scaling down their size and cost for use at the Edge. A 
``data center-only'' strategy may leave us vulnerable to not having the 
compute resources we need where we need them.
The start of the marathon
    These systems require significant investment, scientific progress, 
engineering innovation, education, and skills development to bring into 
being. We should not wait. If we hesitate or under-invest, other 
nations could take the lead in creating and using these technologies 
for commercial and military applications. Through legislation like the 
CHIPS Act and the earlier National Quantum Initiative, Congress and the 
White House have already taken important steps to begin to secure our 
quantum future. More is needed. We need to accelerate the development 
of this technology and do this in parallel with building a robust 
domestic supply chain and workforce.
    The race is on, but we have a long way to go to perfect usable 
quantum computers. We must rapidly scale these systems to make them 
usable.
    Other types of quantum technology--such as quantum inertial 
sensors, quantum radio-frequency receivers, and atomic clocks--are much 
closer to becoming fieldable devices. These have the potential to 
protect against GPS denial and improve intelligence gathering with high 
sensitivity receivers in the next few years, not decades. Investments 
in these technologies will feed back into and accelerate our quantum 
computing development. My company, ColdQuanta, uses ``cold atom'' 
technology we have already deployed on the International Space Station 
with the Jet Propulsion Laboratory to build our qubits.\4\ We expect 
systems based on cold atoms to scale up to the needed range.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ https://coldquanta.com/coldquantas-latest-ultracold-technology-
heads-to-the-international-space-station/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quantum sensors for the near term
    ``Quantum'' has many other applications. Positioning, navigation, 
and timing, or ``PNT,'' concerns accurately locating ourselves and 
moving to where we need to be. Doesn't GPS, the Global Positioning 
System, already give us this? News reports have stated that foreign 
powers have spoofed or denied GPS services to confuse and disadvantage 
their enemies at war. Quantum inertial sensors, including 
accelerometers and gyroscopes, and quantum atomic clocks, should be 
able to replace GPS, prevent spoofing, or act as a backup in case of 
local and catastrophic service failure.
    Commercially, these can benefit transportation and logistics on 
land and at sea. From a defense and intelligence perspective, quantum 
sensors could provide required, stable, and accurate measurements for 
our use on land, at sea, and in space. Quantum gravity sensors could 
assist in finding new energy and mining resources and detect 
underground facilities not apparent from visual examination.


    Work has begun to use quantum sensing as antennae for radio 
frequencies such as those used in communications networks and cellular 
devices. We believe we can eventually manufacture smaller and more 
sensitive receivers that allow us to use more of the radio spectrum. 
For example, a ship, plane, or troops on the ground could have more 
compact communications systems with broader connectivity. In the U.K., 
British Telecommunications has already started trials of quantum RF 
technologies to augment 5G and presumably incorporate into 6G 
eventually.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ https://newsroom.bt.com/bt-trials-new-quantum-radios-to-boost-
next-generation-5g--iot-networks/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While it may seem more straightforward to focus only on computing, 
quantum sensors provide the data we will need to incorporate into 
processing at the Edge for commercial, intelligence, and military use. 
The data has the advantage that it is already encoded in a manner 
usable by quantum computers.
    Being in the proper format does not mean we can move data where 
needed. The United States must invest in quantum interconnect 
technology to link quantum computers, sensors, and memory. Without the 
interconnects, we will restrict ourselves to building systems that 
cannot scale big enough or use data for the practical applications I 
have described above.
    As I said at the beginning of this statement, quantum refers to 
Nature's structure and behavior at the smallest levels. Quantum 
technologies operate at the best resolutions possible. There is no 
higher resolution to go to than the quantum scale. There is no ``next 
time'' to get this right, to invest more aggressively, for the results 
and leadership we must have.
The call to action for skills and components
    In what I think is a massive understatement, quantum is not easy. 
Programming a quantum computer is unlike writing software for a phone, 
laptop, cloud server, or supercomputer. Just as we teach classical 
programming in high schools today, we must extend curricula to include 
quantum. We must strengthen our education in computer science, physics, 
mathematics, and engineering if we expect to have a national workforce 
with the necessary skills to build and use quantum tech. We have made a 
good start at quantum computing education, but this must accelerate. We 
must extend physics and engineering education throughout our university 
systems to translate the science of quantum sensors into practical and 
ubiquitous products.
    While we always need some people with the most advanced degrees at 
the leading edge, the quantum workforce will not be limited to those 
with doctorates. Just as today, we will need trained workers in 
manufacturing, I.T., and software and hardware engineering. There will 
be many new jobs and types of jobs, and we must have a trained 
workforce to fill them.
    We must also secure our domestic supply chain. For many quantum 
modalities like ColdQuanta's cold atoms, we need increased access to 
lasers and rapid evolution of photonic integrated circuits. We must 
drive down the cost and size of these components. Only then can the 
United States ensure it can build the computers and sensors it needs.
Ensuring successful government, academic, and commercial collaboration
    We appreciate your legislative support to reorient Federal spending 
and policy priorities to accelerate quantum development. Now is the 
time to guarantee we can execute the program. In particular, we require 
better procedural and program mechanisms to navigate the so-called 
``valley of death'' stage of development, where we have scattered 
investment in and development of the pieces without integration into 
deployed systems of record.


    From where will quantum innovation come? To date, it has grown out 
of academia and been prototyped for government agencies but has only 
been commercialized by industry to a limited degree. Software is vital 
to making the quantum hardware usable, so in May, we acquired 
Super.Tech, a startup spun out of the University of Chicago. We must 
strengthen and accelerate the academia-government-commercial 
collaboration to get practical and pervasive quantum technologies in 
the next several years instead of the next several decades.
    There is currently a shortage of Federal assistance to help small 
quantum companies transition their promising cutting-edge technology 
now under development to prototyping and then to production scale and 
capability. These are expensive steps that have sidetracked many 
promising advances in the past. We can't let that happen to the best-
of-breed quantum projects now, given the stakes of losing to foreign 
adversaries. We need to do more to track, manage, and coordinate the 
many individual Federal quantum R&D projects across the government. We 
must ensure gaps are understood and covered, the most promising 
technology is fast-tracked and well supported, and overlaps and 
duplications are removed.
    Thank you for this opportunity to highlight the quantum 
technologies that will be most valuable to the United States and to 
offer my recommendations to secure our leadership.
    I am happy to answer any questions you may have.
Qualifications--Dr. Bob Sutor
    How can I be so sure that quantum will change the world as I 
describe it? I am a 40-year computer industry veteran. I have an 
undergraduate degree from Harvard and a Ph.D. from Princeton, both in 
theoretical mathematics. In 2017, I became part of the leadership team 
of the IBM Quantum program after leading the 300-person IBM 
Mathematical Sciences Department for six years. I am the author of the 
quantum computing book Dancing with Qubits and the classical-quantum 
software development textbook Dancing with Python. I am a frequent 
keynote speaker at industry conferences. I have been quoted and 
interviewed in the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Guardian, 
Barron's, USA Today, CNBC, and many other media outlets.
    I moved to ColdQuanta in March after 39 years at IBM because I 
believe the value of quantum technology extends far beyond the data 
center.
    At ColdQuanta, Inc., we trace our roots back to a collaboration 
between two brilliant minds: Albert Einstein and Satyendra Nath Bose. 
In 1924, Bose sent a letter to Einstein and respectfully asked for his 
help. This correspondence sparked their uncovering of a new form of 
matter, later named the ``Bose-Einstein Condensate (BEC).'' When we 
cool atoms to a few millionths of a degree above absolute zero, they 
begin to clump together, condense into the lowest accessible quantum 
state, and transition from a gas into a BEC. However, this was 
speculation, as the technology needed to create BEC wouldn't exist for 
another 70 years.
    In 1995, Dr. Eric Cornell and Dr. Carl Wieman created the first-
ever BEC in Boulder, Colorado, at JILA--a collaboration between the 
University of Colorado at Boulder and the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology (NIST). Drs. Cornell and Wieman won the Nobel 
Prize in Physics in 2001.
    ColdQuanta was co-founded in 2007 in Boulder, CO, by Professor Dana 
Anderson, an academic colleague of Drs. Cornell and Wieman. Since then, 
the company has built atomic clocks and quantum sensors, often in 
response to requests from United States agencies, including NASA, 
DARPA, and the Departments of Defense and Energy. Over the last four 
years, we have started the development of a quantum computer under the 
scientific direction of Professor Mark Saffman at the University of 
Wisconsin, Madison. We are a global company focusing on the United 
States and the United Kingdom. Our offices are in Colorado, Wisconsin, 
Illinois, and Oxford, United Kingdom, with additional employees in New 
York, Texas, California, and Florida.
    ColdQuanta is committed to delivering broad quantum advantage 
through direct research and development of a wide range of quantum 
technology in collaboration with government and academia. We have 
become, in many ways, the foundation of a quantum supply chain and 
ecosystem. We are the only United States manufacturer of many key 
components for cold neutral atom and adjacent quantum research. We have 
two hundred employees, over 80 of which have PhDs in physics, 
engineering, mathematics, and computer science. We have 23 United 
States patents and many patent applications we expect to become patents 
with high probability in the next 12 months.

    The Chair. Thank you. Dr. Sutor. Thank you so much. Dr. 
Jones, thank you for being here. I look forward to your 
testimony.

        STATEMENT OF HENRY L. JONES II, Ph.D., DIRECTOR,

              RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT AND SCIENTIFIC

                ENTREPRENEURSHIP, UNIVERSITY OF

                      SOUTHERN MISSISSIPPI

    Dr. Jones. Good morning, Chair Cantwell, Ranking Member 
Wicker, and members of the Committee. It is an honor to be 
invited to testify on this topic today. For the record, I am 
Dr. Henry Jones, Director of Research Development and 
Scientific Entrepreneurship at the University of Southern 
Mississippi.
    Our nation has a strong base of institutions like ours that 
is a source of enormous competitive advantage, if we make the 
most of our diversity. I have experienced the opportunities and 
the challenges presented to us by our broad mosaic of a 
country. As an entrepreneur and investor, I have been a part of 
creating companies in Silicon Valley, in Chicago, and in 
Mississippi, and Alabama.
    I was educated in the public school system of my small town 
of 1,000 in rural South Mississippi and at a public Mississippi 
university before moving West to Stanford University to earn a 
Ph.D. in aeronautics and astronautics.
    I lived in Silicon Valley during the 90s dot com boom, 
inspiring me to start my first company. Using science developed 
in Mississippi State University lab, our Government's Landsat 7 
satellite, and create cutting edge commercial products.
    So from the start of my career, I have seen what academia 
and Government and industry can do together. What have we 
learned along the way? Government has had a tough time keeping 
up with the pace of technology. The people and processes of 
industry are built for competition with agile, lean, product 
market fit, and other concepts promoting quick iterations that 
are intensely customer driven.
    The National Science Foundation has introduced these 
concepts with its I-Corp program that has spread to the 
National Institutes of Health and the Department of Energy. And 
the Department of Defense created the Hacking for Defense 
course at Stanford, which I have been teaching at Southern 
Miss.
    USM has implemented these innovation approaches with our 
partners at NOAA, preparing its 55 petabytes of data for public 
customer driven analysis. I commend this committee for 
supporting the new NSF Directorate for Technology, Innovation 
and Partnerships, or TIPS, which I believe will accelerate the 
impact of these and similar programs. Unexpected innovations 
come from unconventional connections.
    The latest data driven research and innovation is finding 
that cross-pollination of ideas from very different fields is 
how great leaps forward take place. EPSCoR, the established 
program to stimulate competitive research, enables this type of 
progress by bringing together universities and their individual 
innovators and exposing them to unfamiliar concepts in multiple 
ways.
    Thank you, Senator Wicker, for your leadership by ensuring 
that EPSCoR States will receive an increase in NSF funding, 
which was the action needed to support continued geographic and 
economic diversity. In our economic system, the most important 
resources are customers and capital.
    This committee was on target with the CHIPS and Science 
Act, in particular the creation of regional tech hubs to 
promote the conditions for new concentrations of these 
important resources. Thanks to you, Senator Wicker, and your 
colleagues here, one-third of the new 8 to 18 new hubs will 
include EPSCoR States as a coalition member, and that matters.
    I have been a Mississippi tech executive pitching for 
capital on Sandhill Road, where those investors expected us to 
move to Silicon Valley as we grew. As these tech hubs are 
created, special consideration should be given to the alignment 
of capital pipelines, from angel to venture, or else the future 
tech hub success stories will feel that same gravitational 
pull. Diversity is a national resource for resilience.
    The tech industry sees the competitive necessity of a 
diverse workforce. Conforming cultures lead to groupthink and 
being blindsided by unconventional ideas. Companies are seeking 
diversity in every dimension it can be achieved, yet are 
struggling in the most significant area, enough trained U.S. 
citizens.
    I am sure we have enough capable U.S. citizens, but we are 
missing something in the early stages of the educational 
pipeline. There are generational and socioeconomic barriers to 
STEM futures that can feel insurmountable. Our university has 
recently modified our computer science curriculum to 
incorporate industry certifications as milestones within our 
degree programs in case a student can't put 4 years of courses 
together at once.
    Academia has more innovation that we can do. My biggest 
fear in regard to securing our leadership in these technologies 
is that instead of applying the energy and resources to 
accelerate, that we coast instead. Like a race car driver 
seeing open road ahead but with no rearview mirror, we won't 
know that our competition has passed us until they are out in 
front. Even then, it takes time to accelerate and catch up if 
we can.
    This hearing, the CHIPS Act, EPSCoR, and the NSF TIP 
Directorate are the right things to do for us to accelerate 
now. Thank you again for this opportunity to speak with you.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Jones follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Henry L. Jones II, Ph.D., Director,
         Research Development and Scientific Entrepreneurship,
                   University of Southern Mississippi
    Good morning Chair Cantwell, Ranking Member Wicker, and members of 
the Committee. It is an honor to be invited to testify on this topic 
today. For the record, I am Dr. Henry Jones, Director of Research 
Development and Scientific Entrepreneurship at the University of 
Southern Mississippi (USM).\1\ Like most of the 3,000 four-year 
universities around our country, USM serves local, regional, national 
and global constituents through our bright students and dedicated 
faculty and staff. Our nation has a strong, diverse base of 
institutions like ours that is a source of enormous competitive 
advantage--if we make the most of it. If instead our policies promote a 
narrow-minded approach that directs attention to a few big brand name 
institutions, this national advantage disappears and we lose the 
resilience of our country's diversity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.usm.edu/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I have experienced the opportunities and challenges presented to us 
by our broad mosaic of a country. As an entrepreneur and investor I 
have been a part of creating companies in Silicon Valley and Chicago--
and in Mississippi and Alabama. I was educated in the public-school 
system of my small town of 1000 in rural south Mississippi and at a 
public Mississippi university--before moving west to Stanford 
University to earn a Ph.D. in Aeronautics and Astronautics. I lived in 
Silicon Valley during the 90s Dot Com boom, inspiring me to start my 
first company using science developed in a Mississippi State University 
lab and our government's Landsat 7 satellite to create cutting-edge 
commercial products for foresters. From the start of my career, I have 
seen what academia and government and industry can do together.
What have we learned along the way?
    Government has had a tough time keeping up with the pace of 
technology. The people and processes of industry are built for 
competition, with Agile, Lean, Product/Market Fit, and other concepts 
promoting quick iterations that are intensely customer driven. The 
National Science Foundation (NSF) has introduced these concepts with 
its I-Corps program \2\ that has spread to the National Institutes of 
Health (NIH) and the Department of Energy (DoE), and the National 
Security Innovation Network (NSIN) \3\ within the Department of Defense 
(DoD) created the Hacking for Defense (H4D) course \4\ at Stanford 
which I have been teaching at Southern Miss as Designing Solutions for 
Defense (DS4D).\5\ USM has implemented these innovation approaches with 
our partners at the Coastal Data Development program within the 
National Centers for Environmental Information at NOAA,\6\ preparing 
its 55 Petabytes of data for public, customer-driven analysis. I 
commend the Committee for supporting the new NSF Directorate for 
Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships (TIP),\7\ which I believe will 
accelerate the impact of these and similar programs. I was on a call 
earlier this week with Jason Calacanis,\8\ one of the most successful 
Silicon Valley investors in early stage companies, and he listed areas 
like healthcare and hardware where startups struggle greatly for 
funding due to bureaucracy and insufficient basic research. I recommend 
that TIP's Assistant Director Gianchandani contact Mr. Calacanis and 
other startup experts, to ask for suggestions for how the NSF can 
change that math.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://beta.nsf.gov/funding/initiatives/i-corps
    \3\ https://www.nsin.mil/
    \4\ https://www.nsin.mil/hacking-for-defense/
    \5\ http://ds4d.usm.edu
    \6\ https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/
    \7\ https://beta.nsf.gov/tip/
    \8\ https://www.linkedin.com/in/jasoncalacanis/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unexpected innovations come from unconventional connections. The 
latest data-driven research in innovation is finding that cross-
pollination of ideas from very different fields is how great leaps 
forward take place. EPSCoR,\9\ the Established Program to Stimulate 
Competitive Research, enables this type of progress by bringing 
together universities and their individual innovators and exposing them 
to unfamiliar concepts in multiple ways. Thank you, Senator Wicker, for 
your leadership by ensuring that EPSCoR states will receive an increase 
in NSF funding, which was the action needed to support continued 
geographic and economic diversity. I believe in this program, too--I 
serve on a statewide EPSCoR board because it makes sense for our 
universities to work together. What I observed is that the real 
potential of EPSCoR is its creation of new relationships, better 
communications between institutions at the faculty level, and policy 
changes that align incentives for working together, all to create a 
long-lasting environment of unconventional collaborations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ https://beta.nsf.gov/funding/initiatives/epscor
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In our economic system, the most important resources are Customers 
and Capital. For this reason, a few large urban areas are 
understandably attracting more than their share of each. This Committee 
was on target with the CHIPS and Science Act, in particular the 
creation of Regional Tech Hubs, to promote the conditions for new 
concentrations of these resources. Thanks to you, Senator Wicker, and 
your colleagues here, one third of the 18 new Hubs will include EPSCoR 
states as a coalition member, and that matters. I have been a 
Mississippi tech executive pitching for capital on Sand Hill Road, 
where those investors expected us to move to Silicon Valley as we grew. 
As these Tech Hubs are created, special consideration should be given 
to the alignment of capital pipelines, from angel to venture, or else 
the future Tech Hub success stories will feel that same gravitational 
pull. Similarly, the Hubs should consider the presence of customers as 
the driving force for technology adoption, not the location of the 
technologists, possibly creating `virtual hubs' for certain types of 
problems like cybersecurity where the customer environment is primarily 
online.
    Diversity is a national resource for resilience. My friends at the 
big tech giants like Microsoft and Amazon tell me that those 
organizations have seen the competitive necessity of a diverse 
workforce. Conforming cultures lead to groupthink and being blindsided 
by unconventional ideas. These companies are seeking diversity in every 
dimension it can be achieved, yet are struggling in the most 
significant area--enough trained U.S. citizens. I am sure we have 
enough capable U.S. citizens, but we are missing something in the early 
stages of the educational pipeline. One of my childhood friends is a 
fourth-generation logger, yet his son is a natural with computer 
programming--he's a proud nerd. This family doesn't know what a STEM 
career looks like or how to afford a technical education. Luckily we 
now have him on a path to maximize his innate skills and interests, but 
through this experience I'm discovering that there are generational and 
socioeconomic barriers to STEM futures that can feel insurmountable. 
Our School of Computing Science and Computer Engineering \10\ at USM 
has recently modified our computer science curriculum to incorporate 
industry certifications as milestones within our degree programs, in 
case a student can't put four years of courses together at once. The 
Center for Military Veterans, Service Members, and Families at USM \11\ 
introduces veterans to resources within higher education, and also 
prompts the academic community to make changes to welcome these high 
potential students who aren't coming directly from high school. 
Academia has more innovation we can do.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ https://www.usm.edu/computing-sciences-computer-engineering/
    \11\ https://www.usm.edu/military-veterans/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My biggest fear in regard to securing our leadership in these 
technologies is that instead of applying the energy and resources to 
accelerate, that we coast instead. Like a race car driver seeing open 
road ahead but with no rear-view mirror, we won't know that our 
competition has passed us until they are out in front. Even then, it 
takes time to accelerate and catch up--if we can. This hearing, the 
CHIPS Act, EPSCoR, and the NSF TIP Directorate are the right thing to 
do--we need to accelerate now. Since I started college 30 years ago, 
every year I have shared classrooms and workplaces with international 
colleagues--hard-working, curious, and intelligent. We are all familiar 
with our trade imbalance, but what about our insight imbalance? Do we 
have widespread knowledge of what China is doing and can do, in the 
same way they know about us? Could one of the programs mentioned above, 
or another one, start sending U.S. citizens to China in much larger 
numbers to begin to learn from them? That would be the wise action of a 
leader who wants to stay ahead. How do we get a very clear image in our 
rear-view mirror, and confidently step on the gas?
    Thank you again for this opportunity to speak with you today.

    The Chair. Thank you, Dr. Jones. We will now go to a round 
of questions, and I am going to ask my questions first and then 
turn it over to Senator Hickenlooper to chair the rest of the 
meeting. And I appreciate his leadership at the Subcommittee 
level.
    Dr. Albritton, obviously one of the things we need to do to 
further our efforts here is the $13 billion that was authorized 
for NSF Foundation STEM education efforts. And as we have 
passed previous COMPETES Acts, what has happened, 
circumstances, you can say the downturn of the economy and we 
didn't fully fund the competition bill. So how do we explain to 
people the need for these STEM dollars?
    And second, you mentioned the areas of NSF expertise you 
are already involved in as it relates to these computational 
sciences. The bill was all about translational science. It was 
about a new directorate to translate science faster. Can you 
explain what are the testbed needs of, an example the 
University of Washington, to actually help us combine both the 
workforce and the infrastructure that is needed to do the 
translational science?
    Dr. Albritton. Absolutely. I will start with the first 
question about, I believe, explaining to the public about our 
workforce needs and how we need to fund this, if I have it 
right, Senator Cantwell. I think, you know, look at me, I grew 
up in Louisiana.
    So having the opportunity as a young person to understand 
the excitement of science and engineering. If you look at my 
career, I have been to ping pong in that area, but make sure we 
intentionally tell young people, hey, this is for you, this is 
an exciting area, you can have a future. Tell their parents too 
this is for their children.
    They can grow and become great contributors to the U.S. 
economy. So I think starting early but then making the 
opportunities available. You know, we hear about college costs, 
for example. But as we bring in these more diverse groups of 
people, I think there should be funding to make sure that they 
succeed and prosper.
    So programs that support our students as they come into the 
universities, ensure that every one of them graduates, has 
interactions with industry so that they can see their future 
and prosper. So those are some of the----
    The Chair. Well is it safe to tell our appropriator 
colleagues who may look at this authorization and then decide 
to pass that they are going to fumble the ball?
    Dr. Albritton. Yes, they will fumble the ball. And we have 
already heard from my colleagues that other countries are out 
in front of us. If you look at the numbers of students going 
into STEM, it is far lower than we need. In the State of 
Washington, we don't have the capacity even for the students 
that want to.
    We cannot fumble this ball. It is a global competition. We 
don't want to lose this competition. And we need everyone 
moving forward and playing on this football field, so to speak, 
so that we have got all the brainpower in the U.S. moving us 
toward the goal post.
    So I think yes, we would have fumbled badly if we don't 
want to invest, make sure we have good educational support 
systems for our students so they can see themselves succeeding 
in engineering and science, and then put in the necessary 
infrastructure and support systems so that they grow as 
students and they actually graduate and prosper.
    The Chair. So on the translational science part, what are 
the things that we need to get test labs still established?
    Dr. Albritton. Yes, so test labs. So our vision at the UW 
is to have open, accessible regional hubs. And let's talk about 
quantum. Very, very expensive technology. State of the art 
systems are cooled to almost absolute zero, very environment 
sensitive.
    The National Quantum Initiative funded some regional large 
areas, but it would be truly great to have qubits for our 
students to come and interact with, for example, where they can 
learn the quantum foundations, technology. They can just get 
really jazzed up because of what they have just done by 
flipping a qubit or something.
    So we want regional hubs that have state-of-the-art 
infrastructure for education, workforce development, even 
people that are already out beginning their careers, pulling 
them back to reeducate them for this new emerging area. And 
then also testbeds that have state-of-the-art characterization 
tools, et cetera.
    So researchers don't need monumentally huge grants, but 
they can go into this regional facility that is easily 
accessible and do their wild and crazy ideas, their innovative 
thinking. So all of these, I think, on these regional hubs 
would really lift the U.S. quantum ability.
    The Chair. Well, thank you for that. I think we are going 
to have to explain to our colleagues on appropriations exactly 
how the other aspects.
    There is already some foundation in the bill for us to do 
the testbeds, but we have to show them that this is a 
combination of both. So, thank you. Again, thank you to Senator 
Hickenlooper for chairing the rest of the hearing.
    Senator Hickenlooper [presiding]. Great. Now we can really 
get started--just kidding. I get the privilege of calling on 
the Ranking Member to ask some questions, and just I will 
preface that just make sure everyone is aware that he has been 
one of the great champions in the U.S. Senate in terms of 
maintaining American leadership in innovation and science. 
Senator Wicker.
    Senator Wicker. Well, thank you very much, Senator 
Hickenlooper and Madam Chair. Mr. Breckenridge, tell us--defend 
your statement that Mississippi State is a national leader in 
high performance computing. And when this EPSCoR expansion 
sunsets in 2029, do you have any doubt in your mind that the 
leadership of this country, whoever it is at that point, will 
conclude that this was an excellent decision and should be made 
permanent?
    Mr. Breckenridge. Well, as I stated, MSU has been involved 
in high performance computing for quite some time. We developed 
our first computing cluster system in the late eighties, well 
before this technology became the standard that it is today 
that most supercomputers are built utilizing.
    We have developed the software stacks that enable high 
performance computing and message passing interface, software 
middleware developed at MSU in partnership with the Department 
of Energy and Argonne National Laboratory.
    We pioneered many of the technologies that are used for 
high performance computing communications, from early in the 
90s with Marinette Technologies, these high bandwidth low 
latency interconnects, to the standards that are viewed today 
in InfiniBand.
    MSU has been a leader in that technology. We have also 
excelled in the use of high performance computing. It is not 
just building these systems and designing them, it is actually 
utilizing them to advance science.
    So MSU is widely viewed as the leader in grid generation, 
and we are doing huge amounts of work today in autonomous 
vehicle work and in weather modeling and cybersecurity and so 
many other areas that are heavily dependent upon high 
performance computing.
    Senator Wicker. Thank you. And I just wanted to give you 
the opportunity to say to the rest of the country, those people 
that are listening and that will be reading the transcript, 
that you are a national leader there, in the small town of 
Starkville, Mississippi, and not some land grant outpost that 
is trying to grab a little Federal money.
    Let me turn to Dr. Jones. This EPSCoR, 20 percent goes back 
to 13 percent or so in 2029. Are we going to be able to defend 
this decision? Any doubt in your mind about that?
    Dr. Jones. Yes, sir. I believe in an EPSCoR program like 
you do--[technical problems]--I believe, sir, in the EPSCoR 
program like you do. So much so that I serve on a statewide 
EPSCoR board as an industry member. I think I was chosen 
because I have relationships with all of the statewide research 
institutions, and I knew that it was imperative that our 
universities work together.
    And we will see the results of that collaboration, not 
necessarily in the technology that is developed because that is 
hard to predict, especially on the front end. What we will see 
in the long term are new relationships, better ways to 
communicate, changes in policy that align incentives across the 
universities to work together.
    And so consequently, we will have long lasting 
collaborations of these new sorts that I mentioned earlier.
    Senator Wicker. I just think the results that we produce 
out of this increased research across the length and breadth of 
our country is going to be recognized. Can you take a few 
seconds and tell us about the virtual hubs that you mentioned 
in your testimony?
    Dr. Jones. Sure. So one of the things that I think that we 
can tend to do is we operate like things have always been 
instead of thinking about having a vision for how they might 
be. And so we could connect people when they are most--they are 
closest geographical neighbors, because that is the way that we 
would often done it in the past.
    But we could connect our EPSCoR neighbors because of the 
nature of the expertise that is underlying their ability to put 
new technology together, to bring customers to the table, to 
pull--to create partnerships, to communicate well.
    So a virtual hub might not look like the hubs of the past 
in the same way that our response to the pandemic has allowed 
us to use virtual connections and to meet online as normal as 
it is to meet in person. We can use that same change in mindset 
to connect our EPSCoR States around the country.
    Senator Wicker. Well, it seems that my time has expired, 
but if the Chair would indulge me. Mr. Clark, your virtual 
intelligence didn't have to be too smart to conclude that you 
were really keen on the National AI Research Resource, but it 
did include it in the conclusion. For those of us who didn't 
make an A in chemistry and majored in the liberal arts instead, 
can you help us understand why that is so important and what it 
is?
    Mr. Clark. Absolutely, Senator.
    Senator Wicker. And minus one minute.
    Mr. Clark. Yes. The National AI Research Resource is an 
attempt to create a shared infrastructure, a big computer that 
academics around America can access to put them on a level 
playing field with the private sector.
    One of the ways that we hire people at my company, 
Anthropic, is we find people from Tier I research universities 
and one of the incentives we can offer them to join us is we 
have more computers than them.
    And I don't think we should necessarily have more computers 
than MIT or Stanford or Harvard or really any large scale 
research university. I think that that is why you lose 
academics, and you lose the teaching base.
    So we need to do something to keep these people there and 
let them do experiments close to the ones being done in 
industry and then we can all learn from their insights.
    Senator Wicker. Thank you. And thank you for your 
indulgence, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Great. Again, I want to thank you 
all. Already, I think you all have displayed a lot of the 
rationale behind why we so excited to get you all together 
here. I want to start with Dr. Sutor, and we are--there are a 
number of hubs for quantum computing. Old---CU Boulder and NIST 
have had a partnership dating back to the 1960s and put 
together the JILA.
    Obviously we are going to need--one of the benefits of 
those partnerships is helping create the workforce. I think 
almost all of you have alluded to the importance of maintaining 
a diverse and qualified workforce. How can we expand workforce 
and educational opportunities in quantum computing?
    We have heard about the expense of creating these hubs. And 
what can we look--what can we learn from the success of CU 
Boulder's ecosystem in that regard?
    Dr. Sutor. Well there are two main points to make there. 
And so first starting with Boulder. There was tremendous 
insight, as you said, in 1960s between the Government through 
NIST and CU Boulder to build JILA, which was actually 
originally about astronomy but is now the most precise atomic 
clock in the world, is in Boulder, Colorado, developed there.
    So a tremendous amount of core science there that spills 
over, of course, into the education, many opportunities for 
undergraduates and graduates. But then companies come out of 
that. There was a celebration yesterday of a startup company 
that was founded by people originally at JILA.
    So these three axes of academia, Government, eventually 
leading to commercial success. Now, the other examples are 
Colorado School of Mines, which recently put together a program 
on quantum engineering. We hear a lot about quantum information 
theory and quantum science.
    We should talk much more about quantum engineering because 
that is translating it to implementation. It is a 
multidisciplinary program. It is mathematics. It is physics. It 
is chemistry. It is computer science as well. We have to create 
very practical and complete systems that work.
    As odd as it may seem, we can distribute our investments, 
but ultimately we need working systems, and we need people who 
can use them. As I said in my statement, there are going to be 
many new types of jobs, jobs that we don't even know the names 
of yet. Quantum computing will go beyond classical computing.
    So these jobs are not simply replacing what we have 
already. We are going to need the tens of thousands of new jobs 
on top of everything we have now.
    Senator Hickenlooper. All right. Great. I appreciate that. 
And I have more questions, but I want to rotate my way--I at 
least will be here for a second round of questions. I can 
guarantee you all that.
    Dr. Clark, experts have said that there are 20--up to 21 
different standards of fairness in terms of trying to work 
through this in regards to artificial intelligence. Public and 
private sector entities often build their custom processes as a 
competitive advantage to ensure fairness in a particular 
domain.
    How can we start beginning to aggregate, to concentrate 
around agreed common definitions of what fairness--and fairness 
is one of the most closely held moral values among most 
Americans? Why is it so important that policymakers start to 
align fairness policies?
    Mr. Clark. Thank you, Senator. There is a good example 
already to emulate the work NIST does today. It has a test 
called the facial recognition vendor test, which tests out 
facial recognition systems along a whole bunch of axes that 
test for fairness and bias.
    And what NIST did is took a whole bunch of different 
industry standards and approaches in academia and industry and 
pushed them together into one test that it worked on in 
partnership with a bunch of people.
    And we need to do something similar for AI, where we need 
to find a way to take all of thinking happening in academia and 
industry and find a central place where we can work through 
these issues and arrive at a test or set of tests that we feel 
is fair and representative.
    I would love for that to be a race to the top on fairness 
in industry, and I think we can unlock that if we create this 
kind of test.
    Senator Hickenlooper. You and me both. Let's see, I was 
going to have--ask, where was that question? Ah, Dr. Jones, 
the--AI powers smartphones, features digital assistants, real 
time translation, a lot of those things.
    The future of AI is going to need more R&D to incorporate 
context relevant to the task at hand. What are some examples--
other examples of functions that AI could better perform if it 
could better understand the intentions, the tone of cultural 
cues behind the voice command?
    Dr. Jones. Well, that is a great question. I think that 
maybe, frankly, Mr. Clark might be a better----
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Hickenlooper. I think that is fair enough. You 
know, one thing about a truly expert staff is they will 
gravitate toward the right answer for a different question. I 
am sure we will come back to Dr. Jones as well.
    Mr. Clark. Could you just quickly restate the----
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Hickenlooper. Asking about the importance of 
cultural cues, tone, intentions in terms of what were some of 
the examples of functions that AI could do better if, you know, 
if it could understand those cues? You know, chime--you know, 
voice instructions.
    Mr. Clark. Yes. A way to think about this is the reason why 
we need more testing by a broader set of Americans is for, as 
you build these tests, you learn how to reflect the values of a 
greater set of people. AI currently reflects the values of 
large amounts of data found on the Internet and some of the 
companies that build it, which isn't representative of all 
Americans.
    And so we can find ways to bring a much larger set of 
people into the testing and evaluation of these systems. And 
then you can kind of bacon that cultural background knowledge 
so these systems are more representative and more cues to the 
subtleties of our particular culture.
    Senator Hickenlooper. All right. And Dr. Jones, I didn't 
know, are you are originally from--you are not from Mississippi 
originally?
    Dr. Jones. I am actually from, originally from Mississippi. 
I had a feeling that Mr. Clark was not.
    [Laughter.]
    Dr. Jones. Thought he might be best at answering that 
question.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Well, I thought--again, we will come 
back to this. I am out of time, but the--I think the lilt to 
your voice which gave away, despite all the Stanford education, 
gave away Mississippi origin, that that is one of the big 
issues in terms of figuring out how do you get this, some sort 
of standardization. Anyway, I will come back on the second 
round and now recognize Senator Blackburn who is with us 
remotely.

              STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE

    Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And indeed, 
another Mississippi voice. And I am glad to see that we have 
someone from Mississippi State on the panel today. That is my 
alma mater. So good choice there. Mr. Breckenridge, let me come 
to you for our first question.
    Oak Ridge National Labs in Tennessee, they are home to the 
Frontier, which is the fastest computer in the world, and it is 
capable of executing 1 quintillion FLOPS per second, and it has 
allowed the U.S. to enter the exascale computing era. And this 
is unlocking tremendous potential.
    We are really so proud of the team that is working on this. 
But if you would just touch for a moment what supercomputing 
and quantum technologies will unlock, what economic and 
benefits that you expect to see coming from this, and then talk 
touch on the downsides, whether they are economic or otherwise, 
of the U.S. losing the quantum race?
    Mr. Breckenridge. Thank you, Senator. Yes, absolutely, the 
number one system in the world is at Oak Ridge National 
Laboratory, as you indicated. The U.S. must--we must put more 
focus into developing and giving access to these systems to a 
broader set of our research community.
    The systems that are available now to the traditional 
university are an order of magnitude smaller or maybe many 
orders of magnitude smaller than that of the--at Oak Ridge 
National Laboratory.
    This is a focus that we have to work on, not only from a 
technology standpoint, but from a workforce standpoint as well. 
And if you don't mind, would you repeat your second question?
    Senator Blackburn. Well, what are the downsides? You know, 
I think we know of some of the benefits, and I am pleased that 
you mentioned the workforce because since not everybody has 
access like the students at University of Tennessee who are 
partnered with Oak Ridge and who are working Frontier, I think 
that that is one of the downsides. But also, I want you to talk 
about what you see is the downsides if we lose this race, this 
quantum race.
    Mr. Breckenridge. Oh, losing the quantum race has a huge 
downsides from a national security standpoint to being able to 
do advanced technology. So I think it is something certainly we 
are unable to lose. It is just not an option for us.
    Senator Blackburn. OK.
    Mr. Breckenridge. The--from the benefits of HPC and 
quantum, you know, those are many. Whether that is making safer 
vehicles or doing a better job in predicting say where 
hurricanes may impact us.
    This is certainly something that we are facing now. If we 
are able to see and develop a better model of where these 
hurricanes would make landfall, we could save lives and 
increase our responsiveness to that, and to that point, 
minimize the economic impacts to us as much as we can.
    Senator Blackburn. Well, and I think we all know that 
having quantum technologies will open the door for so many 
things with logistics, with blockchain, with cryptocurrencies, 
with supply chain. Mr. Sutor, I want to come to you on the 
supply chain issue. There has been a lot of discussion about 
semiconductors, and we have heard about that today.
    We have heard about, and we are seeing some of the worst 
supply chain issues that we have ever had. So, what--how is 
that prohibiting what your company is doing? And how severely 
do you see this impacting the growth in this technology sector 
for our country as we face these supply chain constraints?
    Dr. Sutor. Well, Senator, first of all, so when we speak 
about quantum computing, it is an integration of classical 
computing as well as this new technology. So any problems we 
may have with supply chain, with classical computing, such as 
semiconductors, will spill over into our inability to do things 
with quantum.
    But there are some new technologies such as photonics, 
photonic integrated circuits, as well as lasers. With 
ColdQuanta, we sometimes say we shine lasers at very tiny 
things, and those are being atoms. Well, we need many atoms, 
many qubits, ultimately tens of thousands or millions of those.
    We need extremely robust laser technology that we can get 
when we need it. We have to scale these things down. You can't 
have 10,000 lasers just to do a little bit of computing. So we 
need advanced technology and development, domestic technology 
on these so-called photonic integrated circuits.
    Think of semiconductors, but instead of pushing electrons 
around, we are pushing around photons of light. Many other 
countries have developed photonics centers. I believe the 
Netherlands have invested over $1 billion in photonics as well. 
Are we happy enough to get these sorts of essential supplies 
from outside our borders?
    So I believe a systematic examination of the different, not 
just quantum computing, but quantum sensing modalities, the 
constituent parts are a necessary, identification of where they 
come from, and can we provide those ourselves? But for us, it 
is photonics, and it is lasers.
    Senator Blackburn. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Hickenlooper. You bet. Thank you. Now let's switch 
to Senator Klobuchar, again remotely.

               STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA

    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much. Thanks for holding 
this hearing. Very important. My state brought to the world 
everything from the pacemaker to the Post-it note, and like 
every other State, we are facing workforce issues. I know that 
this has come up already in the hearing.
    Dr. Sutor, in your testimony, you mentioned that the future 
quantum workforce will not be limited to those with doctorates, 
that we need trained workers in manufacturing, IT, hardware 
engineering. What are some of the trained skills we are going 
to need in our next generation? And if you could be brief, I 
have got a lot of questions.
    Dr. Sutor. First, computer science. The best classical 
computer scientist or software engineer could be a terrible 
quantum computer scientist or engineer. It is really so 
radically different that we have to start at the very lowest 
levels, and in high school, for example, for this training.
    We must make sure that we don't just focus on the sciences, 
we focus on the practical. We are going to need to manufacture 
these components. These are new techniques, and these are the 
types of skills and jobs we are going to have to educate.
    Senator Klobuchar. OK. Thank you. Mr. Clark, researchers in 
my home state at Mayo in Rochester have partnered with 
universities and data science specialist to use artificial 
intelligence to process incredibly complex clinical data to 
uncover causes of everything from cancer to childbirth options 
for expectant moms. In your testimony, you highlight the 
significant role artificial intelligence will have in improving 
health care. How can we facilitate these partnerships?
    Mr. Clark. One of the best ways to facilitate partnerships 
here is to take out some of the complications involved in 
handling this very sensitive data. And the reason I have 
referred to the National AI Research Resource so much is it can 
prove to be a place where we can prototype new governance 
systems that are both sensitive to HIPPA but make it easier for 
a broader set of researchers to access medical data.
    You know, bring the data to where a large computational 
system is so you can train breakthrough systems. And bring as 
many universities and hospitals together in a partnership so 
you can make sure that the systems you train are fair and 
representative and will work on different populations across 
America.
    Senator Klobuchar. Very good. I think another area that, 
actually Senator Wicker and I have a bill, on this, Precision 
Ag Connectivity Act, another area where we are going to see 
this, and I know you mentioned it in your testimony, Mr. Clark, 
is an Ag with best leveraging technologies to be able to--AI 
technologies to be able to do everything from figure out how 
much water they need, we could save a whole bunch of water, to 
planting and other things.
    So I am not going to ask any question on that because I 
want to, in my remaining time, move on to a few of the 
challenges we have. And you, Mr. Clark, I will ask you this. We 
need more transparency when it comes to the recommendation 
algorithms that most Americans encounter in their social media 
feeds every day.
    Senator Coons and Portman and I have teamed up on the 
Platform Accountability and Transparency Act to require digital 
platforms to give independent, verified researchers access to 
data with appropriate privacy protections.
    You recommend that the Government invest in the measurement 
and monitoring of artificial intelligence development. Can you 
tell us what kind of information and resources a researcher 
like yourself would need in order to fully evaluate how an AI 
system would affect users?
    Mr. Clark. Thank you, Senator. The primary thing you need 
to do is give them access. You need to give them access to the 
system and the ability to run tests on it. And I will give you 
just a concrete example. I work with AI systems that are made 
of billions of parameters, billions of things that we need to 
understand.
    Recommender algorithms these days have trillions of 
parameters. So the time to invest in this and bring researchers 
to this is right now. You need to give access to the system. 
You need to let them run experiments, and you need to find a 
way that not just companies control access to that, but 
researchers are able to, even if they find uncomfortable 
things, continue that research so we can have that discussion.
    Senator Klobuchar. Very good. And also in your testimony, 
you highlight the importance of that shared public research 
infrastructure with the National AI Research Resource. How can 
supporting and NAIRR is helping create leadership in these 
emerging industries?
    And again, Senator Lummis and I actually have a bill along 
these lines with the social media platforms to get at some of 
the work that needs to be done with these companies. Could you 
answer that quickly? And then I can--you can move on to my 
colleagues.
    Mr. Clark. Yes, I will be very brief. In my oral testimony, 
I compared some of these modern AI systems to Swiss Army 
knives. They are actually more complicated than that. They are 
like Swiss Army knives where you don't know all of the things 
the knife can do until you have built it and spent a lot of 
time testing it.
    So the reason why you need a National AI Research Resource 
is so researchers can train and develop some of these systems 
on par with the opaque ones and industry and work out what all 
the capabilities are, and which ones need sort of regulations 
and which ones are just very exciting and can be used in the 
economy.
    Senator Klobuchar. All right. Well, very good. Thank you to 
all the witnesses. Appreciate your work.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Senator Klobuchar. And now 
I get to call on our Ranking Member. This actually started 
within the Subcommittee, the Space and Science Subcommittee, 
which I Chair, but really Co-Chair with Senator Lummis from 
Wyoming.

               STATEMENT OF HON. CYNTHIA LUMMIS, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING

    Senator Lummis. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. This--being 
on this committee is like a wicked indulgence, because we get 
to ask you questions, some of the most cutting edge, brilliant 
people in our country. And as I looked at your bios, I am just 
extremely impressed with your capabilities.
    Dr. Albritton, I have a question for you that I am going to 
start with, and then I want to go to Mr. Lupien, who is at the 
University of Wyoming. Dr. Albritton, I am interested to hear 
about projects in your specialty that you are working on. You 
have such an impressive background.
    Dr. Albritton. Are you--me, personally, or the University 
of Washington?
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Lummis. Well, either or both.
    Dr. Albritton. So me personally, I am a biomedical 
engineer, by the way, but I advocate for the entire college. 
And I can give a wonderful example about how AI needs more 
cultural context. I work on digestive diseases and the 
intestinal track. Google is always offering me digestive aids 
and other remedies because it can't distinguish what is 
research and what is an actual physical problem.
    So that is what I do and a lot of entrepreneurship. But my 
major job now is really as chief advocate for the College of 
Engineering. And the fabulous part is I get to learn. As you 
said, it is wickedly fun. I learn about quantum information. I 
learn about great battery storage. We have a new technology.
    Senator Cantwell was talking about our test bed facility 
called QT3 that we are trying to roll out at the University of 
Washington, where anyone can come in and play with a qubit. The 
students can.
    It is just amazing fun and excitement to learn about other 
things like our AI centers, AI for social good, really trying 
to make our technology benefit humankind, lead to--allow people 
to live better lives. It is just a super fun job, so thank you.
    Senator Lummis. Yes. This is an outstanding panel and a 
great subject. I want to turn to Mr. Lupien. Thank you for 
joining us today and representing some of the cutting edge work 
happening at the University of Wyoming, my alma mater.
    I want to start by asking you to explain distributed ledger 
technology and how it can be used in many different industries 
and sectors. And also, could you take us into what you see as 
the future of distributed ledger technology?
    Mr. Lupien. Well, thank you, Senator. That is a very big 
question for a couple of minute answer. Distributed ledger 
technology, as I mentioned in my testimony, is really just a 
new type of data base. Unlike my colleagues on the panel who 
are dealing with high performance computing applications in 
quantum and AI, blockchain is actually not a high performance 
computing application.
    It is an applied application that will touch pretty much 
everything that we do in our daily lives, very much like we are 
experiencing today with the internet. And where we are going to 
see the future, Senator, I believe, is how value is going to be 
moved much more easily electronically around the world.
    And, you know, we are going to be able to move value almost 
instantly and with the settlement finality that doesn't exist 
in our existing financial systems today, which are based on, 
you know, netting balance sheets to move value. We know we are 
going to move actual value. And where I really see the future, 
Senator, is how digital assets are going to drive some new 
technologies such as the metaverse.
    And, you know, within the metaverse, which is the way I 
basically describe it is, you know, kind of the Internet on 
steroids. It is going to be an immersive use of the internet. 
Well, digital assets are going to drive that--drive that 
technology. It is how we are going to be paid within the 
universe. It is how we are going to buy things within the 
metaverse.
    And so I think that is the exciting part of where this is 
going. But, you know, blockchain technology itself is kind of 
in its, you know, entering its bread and butter stage where, 
you know, it will be doing a lot of things for consumers and 
industry and our financial services industry, where we don't 
even realize that that technology is what is driving the back 
of the house.
    So, I hope that answers your question, Senator Lummis.
    Senator Lummis. Thank you. And I have only 5 seconds to 
spare, so I will yield back. But if there is another round, I 
find this a fascinating panel, and I want to thank you all for 
taking the time to be here.
    Senator Hickenlooper. I suspect there will be--I know there 
will be a second round because I am not leaving. So, Senator 
Baldwin.

               STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY BALDWIN, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

    Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is been 
wonderful hearing all my colleagues boast about the incredible 
assets in their states. I certainly don't want to pass on my 
opportunity to recognize that the University of Wisconsin-
Madison was the first university in the country to establish a 
professional master's program in quantum computing.
    We also are home in the state to a now Hewlett Packard 
Enterprises, Cray, which has been very involved in 
supercomputing and exascale supercomputers, and we hope we will 
have a role, very prominent role as we imagine and move to 
quantum.
    So I wanted to start, by the way, recognizing Dr. Sutor 
that ColdQuanta has a Madison, Wisconsin office and we are very 
pleased to be host of that. What I wanted to start with is, 
given the passage of the CHIPS and Science Act, and there are 
lots of references to appropriations continuing that drive, I 
will say I am one of the appropriator members of the Commerce 
committee, so I am listening very carefully to that.
    But there is this momentum federally to accelerate quantum 
tech transition through the, how can we have it go through the 
valley of death, as you were describing in your testimony, and 
into commercialization? What sort of--how can we use the 
opportunity of this momentum right now?
    Dr. Sutor. Let me reiterate, we are very happy to be in 
Madison. When ColdQuanta decided to in fact start its quantum 
computing effort 4 years ago, we turned to Dr. Mark Saffman in 
the physics department.
    We have about 25 employees there, many of whom were trained 
out at University of Wisconsin as well. So it has been a great 
asset for us. When we talk about new technologies, they are 
often created by small companies. Yes, some of the big ones 
invest sometimes startups.
    Unfortunately, 90 percent of all startups fail. And I keep 
researching this number year after year, and it keeps coming up 
that 90 percent of all startups fail. And so one fundamental 
question is, are we willing to let 90 percent of all the great 
new technology, particularly in quantum technology, which I 
think we can all agree is necessary for our future, are we 
willing to have a 10 percent success rate of moving out of the 
laboratories, the academic laboratories into commercial 
production?
    So what we do need from the Government is support for 
longer term investment to keep these companies going, to get 
them to partner with other smaller companies, to systematically 
evolve this technology into something that works. That is a 
good thing. But that we can manufacture, which is often a very 
different question as well.
    So this is that valley of death that I spoke about, to go 
from great idea to actually manufacturing and selling hundreds 
of thousands, tens of thousands and that is where we need help 
from the Government.
    Senator Baldwin. Yes. And in a number of these cases, the 
Government will be the ultimate consumer, I would imagine. 
Think of the various examples that have been given in weather 
prediction or defense applications, communications. So you know 
that is certainly an opportunity. Let me continue on.
    In 2017, China demonstrated an ability to utilize what is 
called a ``quantum repeater'' to distribute information across 
great distances between Earth and space. This technology will 
eventually enable secure transmission of information not 
susceptible to eavesdropping. And in reality, China is likely 
much more advanced in this space than their published work 
might suggest.
    Unfortunately, competing with China is not only going to be 
just about achieving the next technological breakthrough or 
demonstration. We have to ensure that we also have the organic 
manufacturing base available to support large scale 
commercialization for technologies that have serious security 
implications like quantum networking, but also for quantum 
sensing that will be key for future GPS and satellite 
architectures.
    So, Dr. Sutor, what areas of the industrial base do we need 
to be focusing on for the raw components and material that we 
will need to maintain a future quantum manufacturing edge over 
China?
    Dr. Sutor. As we have spoken about quantum computing, we 
have focused on the processing. So that is like thinking of 
your laptop and just thinking of the processor, but not the 
data. The data is critical and that is what comes from quantum 
sensors. That is what is transmitted in quantum networks.
    So for one, I think we need to turn around a lot of our 
considerations and look at a data first view of what we are 
doing with quantum. In the case of quantum networking, the 
repeaters, we need quantum memory, something which we really do 
not know how to do very well at all.
    So as we go through and look at all the quantum 
technologies such as memory, what sorts of quantum technologies 
might be best suited for creating memory so we can get the type 
of secure communication that you mentioned.
    Senator Baldwin. Thank you.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Senator Baldwin. Now I 
have questions--and for those of you who haven't been closely 
following the processes of the Senate, Senator Young was, I 
think it is fair to say, the principle moving force behind the 
CHIPS and Science Act and helped begin it. Would not let it go. 
Continued to push it various times. It got tied up. He was 
relentless.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. TODD YOUNG, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA

    Senator Young. Well, thank you, Chairman. That is kind. And 
I did want to be here for this panel. I thank all of you for 
your work and for your presence here so that we might have an 
opportunity to discuss the CHIPS and Science Act, which we 
think can significantly further our position as it relates to 
American leadership in emerging technologies.
    That, of course, will be vital to our national security and 
our economic health in the future. One of the key provisions in 
the CHIPS and Science Act is the regional tech hub provision. 
This will activate underutilized, and in some respects 
overlooked, regions around the country and support the 
innovation of critical emerging tech areas like quantum and 
artificial intelligence and some other key areas.
    My state, Indiana, is going to benefit enormously from the 
establishment of these tech hubs that will bring together a 
wide array of stakeholders. It is really why it is so important 
that we not only celebrate the passage of this landmark bill, 
and a number are, but continue to focus on its implementation 
and fund key provisions such as the regional tech hub 
provisions.
    Just ask Mr. Clark, sir, why is it important for your mind 
that we fully fund the CHIPS and Science Act? And how will it 
directly impact the work that you are doing on artificial 
intelligence?
    Mr. Clark. Thank you, Senator. It will impact me in two 
ways. One, it gives the ability to create much more ways to 
test and assess AI systems for both economic capabilities and 
safety issues. We DIY a lot of our own evals in my company and 
we try and make those public, but it is hard to sometimes.
    If we can have more evals that are public, it unleashes 
more companies to build more stuff using AI and creates a huge 
asset. And the second way is that it can allow us to fund more 
ambitious infrastructure in the public sector so academics can 
do more impactful work.
    Senator Young. Thank you for that. Dr. Sutor, I know you 
can attest to how the private sector is putting significant 
resources and sweat equity into the development of quantum 
computing. Many Americans view quantum as it's just another pie 
in the sky, Silicon Valley buzz word.
    It is never really going to impact their lives in a 
positive way. Can you discuss why in fact it is the opposite. 
And maybe elaborate on the many ways quantum technology is 
going to impact all of our lives moving forward?
    Dr. Sutor. Let me give two examples where I think many 
Americans, many people around the world are already using 
quantum. For people who have ever had a knee or a shoulder 
injury and have gotten an MRI, that is quantum technology. It 
is higher resolution and usually much safer than X-rays. That 
technology was developed originally in the United States going 
back to the 1940s.
    So people haven't realized they have been doing that. But 
even more common is GPS. We have quantum atomic clocks in 
satellites right now that not only give us precision location, 
and just as we drive as I got here this morning, walked here 
this morning, but they give us highly reliable timestamps that 
we use in high speed networking situations.
    If you go to an ATM and you see the little printout there 
of what time it is that comes from GPS, that comes from quantum 
as well. So in many ways, quantum is already part of our lives, 
and it will become increasingly more so.
    Senator Young. Those are powerful examples. And in your 
testimony, you note that through the CHIPS and Science Act, in 
the National Quantum Initiative, the Federal Government has 
already taken some important steps to secure our quantum 
future. But as you mention, there is more that needs to be 
done. What more can the Federal Government do, what more should 
we do to ensure the U.S. wins the global quantum race?
    Dr. Sutor. Well, I do believe that it comes down to talent 
and it comes down to skills ultimately. There has to be 
somebody that develops this technology. There has to be 
somebody to use the technology efficiently. So we have to 
ensure one way or another, either we can train the people we 
have, or we can get them.
    Quantum talent is spread around the world, including with 
many of our allied nations. For example, the Five Eyes 
countries as well. So I do think we have opportunities to look 
beyond our borders to get the talent we need to evolve this the 
way we must.
    Senator Young. That is good. And so my constituents who 
might be watching this would be encouraged to know that the 
CHIPS and Science Act actually creates some mechanisms and can 
accommodate crowding in talent and treasure from our closest 
allies and developing things like the field of quantum. So 
thank you again all for being here. Chairman.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Excellent questions. And I think that 
it does bear just a moment of diversion on the issue around the 
workforce and immigration. And I think that one of the unique 
advantages we have in the rivalry, the competition with China, 
with countries all around the globe, is that as the leader of 
the free world, we are recognized for the group of freedoms 
that we sometimes take for advantage and yet make us a very 
attractive destination for highly skilled scientists from all 
over the world.
    And I think it would be interesting just to take a moment 
off and just ask each of you how you look at that, just I want 
to make sure that I get you each on the record saying, yes, we 
need to look at trying to attract and welcome, really welcome 
talent.
    And by that, by welcoming, I mean they don't come just for 
a year or two. They get to help be part of our ecosystem on a 
longer term. Dr. Albritton, why don't you start.
    Dr. Albritton. I think we need all the talent that we can 
get. I think you can look at any of the universities in the 
U.S. and see that the talent comes from across the world, not 
just locally or even within the U.S.
    Many of the companies we are talking about, their founders 
are from out of the U.S. but have found homes in the U.S. So 
being an open and a welcoming space, I think gives us a 
technological advantage that we can capitalize so that we have 
a brain collective in the U.S.
    We not only educate our own brainpower, but we also pull it 
in. And we will be richer and more diverse, and I think more 
productive as a result.
    Mr. Clark. As a recently naturalized American citizen, I 
really care about this. Forty-three percent of the people at 
our company come from outside America. They are the best and 
brightest. And the thing that breaks my heart is that we put a 
huge amount of resources into giving them a path to stay here 
and sometimes it is just difficult and they have to go home. I 
wish that we could give a path to everyone.
    Senator Hickenlooper. All right. Appreciate that.
    Mr. Breckenridge. Yes. And being at a university, we 
certainly see a diverse level of students that are here. We 
absolutely need the smartest people. And there is quite a 
supply of talented individuals in the U.S. even though that we 
are not reaching out to. I think there is opportunities for us 
to improve the interest and desire to participate in STEM 
fields.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Yep.
    Dr. Sutor. So I would add, in addition too, I would say the 
university considerations. ColdQuanta is already an 
international company, a 200. We have an office in the UK, in 
Oxford. We have terrific skills, so we get to augment what we 
do with the University of Colorado, the University of Chicago, 
the University of Wisconsin, with Oxford University as well.
    So these types of international partnerships so we can 
achieve our goals are extremely important. So, yes, by all 
means, bring the talent here, but let's use the talent where it 
exists to get to where we need to be.
    Dr. Jones. Indeed, we have no monopoly on intelligence and 
drive, and an inherent desire to be successful and change the 
world. And I think, just as you said, Senator, that is an 
enormous competitive advantage for us.
    And how awesome is it that Mr. Clark is a fellow U.S. 
citizen with me to sit here and testify in this location on 
this topic, and he is just as wholeheartedly in favor of a 
strong America as those of us who were born here.
    Senator Hickenlooper. My grandfather used to say oftentimes 
the adopted child is more passionate about their parents than 
the natural born. Mr. Lupien, do you want to----
    Mr. Lupien. Yes. Thank you, Senator. You know, I think I 
share my view of my colleagues, technology has made the world a 
much smaller place. But I think what we need to do is not only 
look to bring individual talent, but by putting forward smart 
regulation--companies want to be in the United States. And I 
think we want to create a welcoming environment to not only 
bring individual talent, but to bring companies here as well.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Great. Point well made. Thank you for 
that. All right. Now, I am going to shift back to--in case you 
didn't notice, we have been rotating Democrat, Republican to 
make sure this hearing is bipartisan as much as humanly 
possible.
    Senator Rosen is one of the few and maybe the only Senator 
who has actually created software and probably understands more 
about technology than most of us. Senator Rosen.

                STATEMENT OF HON. JACKY ROSEN, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA

    Senator Rosen. Oh well, I think there is a lot of smart--
thank you for that. There is a lot of smart people here. I just 
wrote computer code for a living, so maybe I do have a certain 
knowledge, but you are a scientist as well and there are other 
engineers and, but I appreciate that.
    And of course, thank you for Chairing, and thank you for 
everyone for holding this important--the witnesses for being 
here as I am listening to you speak about what we need, the 
creative and talented individuals that are going to build our 
workforce. People to do the work of the 21st century.
    We passed the CHIPS and Science Act. We have the bipartisan 
infrastructure law. We are going to need talented, creative 
people to do so many things. But today I want to talk about the 
talented and creative people that we are going to need to help 
work on artificial intelligence applications for cybersecurity, 
because according to Acumen Research and Consulting, the global 
market for security products with artificial intelligence, well 
it is expected to reach over $133 billion by 2030.
    I talked about this today. AI technology is rapidly 
evolving. It is essential we dedicate research to understanding 
the full advantages, what AI can do and of course what it can't 
do, and its risk and its applications for cybersecurity. And we 
want to be sure all industries have access to this information 
and technology so they can responsibly plan--will just speak 
here about cyber-attacks, and especially to our AI related 
tools.
    So, Mr. Clark, how can AI related, or AI, excuse me, 
enabled tools, well, they can be used to strengthen our 
cybersecurity posture across industries, and then on the same 
hand, in what ways does AI fall short as a cybersecurity 
solution?
    Mr. Clark. Today, AI systems have started to be able to 
understand code. They can write and generate code and you could 
use that to--in the same way I could spot a sentence that has 
poor grammar using a line and a language AI, I could spot code 
that has bugs in it using a code AI.
    So we are right at the beginning of really, really exciting 
and useful capabilities here. However, when I wrote my oral 
testimony using a language AI, I checked what it wrote before I 
said it to the assembled Senators.
    And so these kind of applications for cyber-defense are 
going to require people working with systems in partnership and 
really, really vigorous and well-funded testing to find out if 
these systems can be truly relied upon.
    Because in the cyber context, you absolutely don't want 
something to, for lack of a term, wing it. Thank you.
    Senator Rosen. Right. No, I agree. Computers are very good 
at either/or. It is this or not this. It is all the algorithms. 
It is greater than, less than--they are binary. And so I think 
you are right where we have to have the human component and 
that is going to get us to the human component built upon STEM 
and cyber workforce shortage.
    We know we have to grow our STEM workforce, our cyber 
workforce across the board. We have 700,000 positions that are 
open across the country. I have bipartisan legislation with 
Senator Blackburn to invest in cybersecurity apprenticeships.
    Senator Capito and I have launched the Women in STEM Caucus 
to bring more women into these wonderfully creative STEM jobs. 
Worked on a world bipartisan STEM Education Act.
    Of course we know the CHIPS and Science Act. But there is 
just so much more to do. So, Dr. Albritton, how can the Federal 
Government work better with, I would say, creating maybe 
apprenticeship programs perhaps, certificate programs, 2 year, 
4 year degrees across the spectrum?
    We need all kinds of folks in this realm. How do you work 
better to potentiate and create this creative new workforce we 
are going to need and bring in girls and underrepresented 
communities?
    Dr. Albritton. Absolutely. So I think one of the things we 
need is long term, stable investment and building the number of 
educators we have and the diversity of educators that work with 
our students to show them the excitement.
    I think investment--we can't always think about the next 
six term pay off, but what will pay off in 5 and 10 years. And 
I often think when we think about education, we are starting at 
an early age, maybe high school, maybe elementary school.
    So I think it is having staying power and being willing to 
invest over time so that you can reap the rewards at some later 
time. And a lot of research is like that. So patience, I guess, 
is one of the best ways to do it and invest long term--long 
term, stable investment in education.
    Senator Rosen. I couldn't agree more. I think that when you 
excite kids in elementary school about learning about robotics 
or computing or science in general, even growing plants, 
whatever it is, they can learn about biology, geology, 
computers, and they learn to internalize that at a young age. 
Very important. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Great. And I think we have a couple 
of Senators coming, but since they are not here, I will just go 
ahead and begin with my second round, and I hope I can slip in 
a question or two. Mr. Breckenridge, you lead a center with 
high performance computing.
    Obviously, understands a lot of the--understand a lot of 
the limitations to how we make sure that these technologies 
have broad and equitable access across the country. You talked 
about that a little bit. Several people have talked about that 
but you as well in your opening statement.
    That--and the needs of the diverse workforce. How is access 
to supercomputing, as it is just now reaching more research 
institutions, how can we promote that equitable access and make 
sure that emerging technologies like quantum computing are 
getting the maximum benefit from all over the country in terms 
of how we build out the engineering that Dr. Sutor talked 
about?
    Mr. Breckenridge. Sure. So high performance computing is 
becoming ubiquitous. Most research universities, maybe even all 
research universities, have high performance computing assets 
there. They may be large, they may be small, but it gives them 
the ability to utilize those assets.
    I think we have got to do the same thing with emerging 
technologies, whether that is quantum or other areas that 
allows the faculty member, the researcher, the student to think 
of new and novel techniques and technologies. And without 
having that immediate access, it is really limiting.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Right. Yes, I couldn't agree more. 
Now I will--I am not done with my second round, I am just 
taking a short hiatus. Senator Peters.

                STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN

    Senator Peters. Thank you, Chairman Hickenlooper. Thank you 
for taking a little hiatus for me. Mr. Clark, in your written 
testimony, you discuss the importance of prioritizing the 
development of resources for testing, evaluation, and 
benchmarking of artificial intelligence systems.
    In Michigan, we are the home of the auto industry and have 
been investing significant resources into AI systems to pilot 
autonomous vehicles that will be able to drive through complex 
city environments without a human driver. But the secret to all 
of that is AI systems that are able to pilot these automobiles 
and handle the massive amount of data coming in from all of the 
sensors.
    Now, it has been described to me that self-driving cars is 
basically the moonshot for AI. When AI was able to do that, AI 
has really proven itself to be able to do all sorts of things 
that will transform industry in meaningful ways. So I would 
like you to discuss some of the existing barriers to testing, 
evaluating, and benchmarking of AI, and what resources do you 
think we will need to overcome these obstacles?
    Mr. Clark. Thank you, Senator. This is a matter close to my 
personal interest. An area that is crucial to doing self-
driving cars well is very large-scale high fidelity simulators.
    You need to simulate not just the cities that you are 
trying to drive your cars around, but you also need to simulate 
people in the cities, weather conditions, all kinds of 
variation and that takes resources, and specifically it takes 
computational power.
    So for more of what we can give researchers access to large 
amounts of computation to run high fidelity simulations, the 
better we can train these vehicles. That is a fundamental 
block.
    Senator Peters. Well, thank you. And another question for 
you, Mr. Clark. While we know that AI can deliver some 
substantial benefits to society, I am also concerned that AI 
will create some significant new dynamics when it comes to 
cybersecurity.
    Providing certainly increased speed and agility for both 
our network defenders, but unfortunately also for our 
adversaries when it comes to cybersecurity. So how should we be 
thinking ahead about ways to continue to improve cybersecurity 
as advances in AI continue to march forward?
    Mr. Clark. We can take AI systems and pair them with human 
experts who will kind of teach the AI systems about how to 
secure cyber infrastructure. And you can think of it as like 
creating a digital immune system for our networks.
    AI model that constantly watches networks and watches for 
suspicious activity and tries to actively heal them and repair 
them. Additionally, we do need to invest in analysis of what is 
going on abroad. Other groups are harnessing this stuff for not 
just defense, but offensive purposes.
    And if we don't have a very clear and calibrated sense of 
where those capabilities are, we could get surprised, which is 
not what any of us want.
    Senator Peters. No, absolutely not. We need to lean forward 
aggressively in that area. I appreciate that answer.
    Dr. Sutor, in May, the Biden Administration issued a 
national security memorandum requiring more proactive 
engagement with critical infrastructure owners and operators to 
ease the migration of our computer systems from today's 
standard encryption algorithms to quantum resistance 
cryptography.
    So my question to you is, what do you see as the key 
challenges for the private sector in this migration?
    Dr. Sutor. I think even if we don't mention the word 
quantum, it can take up to 10 years, for example, for a bank to 
move to a new cryptographic protocol. It is a lot of work. It 
touches many different parts of their systems. So even if 
quantum computers today cannot break encryption, if they can do 
it in 10 or 15 or 20 years, it is a significant problem.
    And so it is something that people have to look at and do a 
real evaluation. What sort of cryptographic profiles, 
techniques do they use today? Are they RSA? Are they elliptic 
curve, for example? When might those be broken and what should 
they put in place to be safe about that?
    I might also add there are export control issues concerning 
this, which is, where do we think quantum computers might be 
able to break crypto? And what should we do about that with 
respect to export controls?
    There has been some very solid work there to define the 
sweet spot to maintain competition developments of the 
technologies while still protect national security.
    Senator Peters. Right. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman 
Hickenlooper.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Great. I am going to--I have been 
told that they are holding a vote open for me on the Senate 
floor. I am the last person to vote. So I am going to ask one 
last question of Dr. Albritton, and I am not going to get to 
come hang out, which is usually my favorite part.
    Once we have gotten all this out on the table, then chew it 
over for another 10 or 15 minutes. As you try to leave, I would 
normally restrain you. At least do my best. Dr. Albritton, we 
talked about fairness a little bit with AI, trustworthiness, I 
think, is another issue that we keep hearing about more and 
more.
    The trustworthy AI systems are more fair, more transparent, 
more explainable, more robust, I think in many cases. As 
requirements for AI systems become stricter, what advantages 
could American companies see if they continue--if we continue 
to make sure we lead the world in making AI trustworthy?
    Dr. Albritton. I think the advantages are unbounded. I 
mean, you could go and be confident that no matter what your 
race or sex, you will--the facial recognition programs will 
treat you equivalent to everybody else. When you apply for a 
job, you will get the best candidate.
    You will not have a biased AI program, maybe selecting for 
certain attributes. So I think it is a more equitable, a more 
diverse, and a more economically productive world, if we can do 
that, because we will have everyone playing on a level playing 
field and everyone will have a chance.
    It is a world now, we have heard about all the great 
competition. We have got to have everyone having a chance, no 
matter what your background, what your other demographics are, 
your economics, et cetera. And I think a fair, more fair AI 
will give us all those things we need.
    So economically, the U.S. is far, far better off with 
fairer systems, in my mind.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Well, I couldn't agree more. And I 
think you have all in different ways played a role in creating 
that, the constantly improving sense of fairness and 
trustworthiness.
    Thank you each, Dr. Albritton, Mr. Clark, Mr. Breckenridge, 
Dr. Sutor, Dr. Jones, Mr. Lupien. I think I have questions for 
each of you that will go into the written--put them in writing 
to you. I guess this will then end today. You are off the hook 
now. Conclude our hearing for today.
    I would like to thank all my Senate colleagues and 
especially our witnesses for this, I think truly fascinating 
discussion. I think the best hearings are the ones where you 
come away from it and you have got more thoughts in your head 
than you came in with, and I think that is certainly true to, 
maximum effect today.
    The hearing record will remain open for questions for two 
weeks until October 13, 2022. Any Senator who would like to 
submit questions for the record may do so. Until then, we ask 
that witnesses submit their responses to those questions by 
October 27, 2022.
    There will be harsh penalties--no, I am just kidding. With 
that, this committee is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                            A P P E N D I X

   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to 
                          Dr. Nancy Albritton
    Compute Access: Academic institutions represented the majority of 
large-scale AI experiments from the 1960s until 2010. U.S. News and 
World Report (2022) ranks the University of Washington (UW) as one of 
the Top 5 Artificial Intelligence Programs \1\ in the Nation. In July 
2021, UW won a $20 million dollar grant over 5 years from the National 
Science Foundation (NSF) to establish a new artificial-intelligence 
research institute for dynamic systems. However, over the past decade 
the industry-academic balance has altered, with the vast majority of 
large-scale AI research carried out by industry. Building large-scale 
AI models can cost tens of millions of dollars and require 300,000x 
more computing power than experiments conducted in the prior decade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-science-
schools/artificial-intelligence-rankings

    Question 1. What are the specific gaps you are seeing in the 
availability of AI computing resources in industry, government, and 
academia? Besides the National AI Research Resource, what else can the 
U.S. government do help academia remain competitive, or better 
collaborate with, private industry in AI research development?
    Answer. Thank you for your leadership of and investment in science, 
technology, engineering and mathematics through the development and 
passage of the CHIPS and Science Act. Artificial intelligence and 
machine learning have spurred significant scientific breakthroughs in 
healthcare, biology, and materials discovery. For example, DeepMind's 
solving of decades-long challenge of protein folding; the use of 
machine learning for more effective chemical synthesis; and PostEra's 
accelerated development of COVID-related drug discovery. More resources 
invested in emerging technologies will generate sizable social and 
economic benefits.
    At the same time, we need more investment in AI policy and national 
strategies to address ethical concerns (equity, fairness, etc.) 
associated with using AI/ML. There are very limited efforts to address 
these concerns in the industry. Emerging connections between AI and 
quantum computing are advancing rapidly. For example, quantum computing 
provides training sets for AI, which then learns how the quantum world 
behaves and can make predictions without solving the exact quantum 
problem each time. Increased Federal investment in quantum computing 
will be critical to maintain our global competitiveness. To continue to 
accelerate discovery sustained and increased funding of the Federal 
agencies that enable us to remain a quantum information leader in a 
fierce global landscape is required.

    AI Skills Gap: In a recent survey in the United States and United 
Kingdom, 93 percent of surveyed companies reported AI as a strategic 
business priority; however, 51 percent found that they lack the right 
mix of skills to fully realize those strategies.\2\ As the Frank & 
Julie Jungers Dean of Engineering, you serve as the Chief Academic 
Officer of the College, overseeing $159 million in research 
expenditures and providing leaderships to over 279 faculty and more 
then 8,000 students.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://www.snaplogic.com/company/media/press-releases/ai-
skills-shortage-research

    Question 2. How do you recommend the U.S. narrow this AI-skills gap 
in industry and, specifically, what can educational institutions like 
UW do build a robust and inclusive pipeline of students to meet the 
growing demand?
    Answer. Universities can play an important role in narrowing the 
AI-skills gap in industry. At the UW we are in the midst of 
diversifying our curriculum to ensure that all students have 
foundational skills in AI and machine learning. For example, in the EU, 
the vast majority of specialized AI academic offerings are taught at 
the master's level; robotics and automation are by far the most 
frequently taught course in the specialized bachelor's and master's 
programs, while machine learning (ML) dominates in the specialized 
short courses.
    In addition, we must advance programs to promote diversity in AI. 
Currently, female graduates of AI PhD programs in North America have 
accounted for less than 18 percent of all PhD graduates on average, 
according to an annual survey from the Computing Research Association 
(CRA). The CRA survey shows that in 2019, among new U.S. resident AI 
PhD graduates, 45 percent were white, while 22.4 percent were Asian, 
3.2 percent were Hispanic, and 2.4 percent were African American.
    Failing to prepare our citizens for the innovation economy 
compromises our Nation's long-term competitiveness and economic 
stability and disadvantages our citizens and communities. Industry, 
government and universities must step up and invest in the STEM 
workforce. As we enter an increasingly specialized economy, America's 
leading research universities, including the University of Washington, 
are uniquely poised to provide leadership, research, and workforce 
education to meet this need, but we need Federal investment to support 
these endeavors.

    STEM Training: You mentioned in your testimony that there is fierce 
competition to hire STEM faculty to educate students. You also 
mentioned that the University of Washington has turned away excellent 
students because student demand exceeds the capacity of your STEM 
programs. The CHIPS and Science Act authorized $13 billion for STEM 
education to help close the gaps in training the STEM workforce.

    Question 3. What types and levels of Federal funding do you think 
might be most effective at helping close the STEM training gap? As 
possible, please provide information on the roles of different types of 
funding (e.g., scholarships, research funding, infrastructure support, 
and teacher professional development and hiring support) and on 
suggested funding agencies, as well as information on how many 
additional students could result from each.
    Answer. Investment in the Nation's STEM educational system is 
essential to grow our economy while preparing our students for the 
fields of tomorrow. STEM graduates drive innovation in health, clean 
energy, technology, aerospace and infrastructure, but our state's 
industries turn elsewhere for workers because our universities cannot 
keep up with demand due to the lack of faculty, space and resources. 
Insufficient STEM capacity denies our state's students access to high-
impact career opportunities. This inaccessibility is particularly acute 
for students traditionally underrepresented in these fields.
    To address the STEM training gap effectively, we need the 
government at the Federal and state level, industry and academia all 
working together. Continued investment in our Federal agencies such as 
NIH, NSF, DOE, is critical to these efforts as well as funding for key 
programs like Pell Grants. In the last academic year close to 11,000 UW 
undergraduates received Pell Grants, more than all the Ivy Leagues 
schools combined. The UW awards $100 million a year in institutional 
grants and scholarships to Washington students to help them pursue 
their education. A third of our undergraduates are the first in their 
families to attend college. We receive more Federal research dollars 
than any other public university in the Nation. Research funding pays 
for graduate trainees as well as undergraduate research experiences. 
More than 7,000 undergraduates conduct research per year at the 
University of Washington. Core facilities and instrumentation dedicated 
to training and research is often very expensive and shared resources 
will enable access for all to state of the art equipment both in 
academia and industry. Finally, STEM engagement, education and 
experiences at all high and middle school levels is foundational to our 
future success.
    Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this important 
hearing.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Kyrsten Sinema to 
                          Dr. Nancy Albritton
    Drought and Fire Monitoring at NOAA: Fire season began in late 
April in Arizona, as the Southwest experiences the most severe drought 
in twelve hundred years. The Tunnel Fire north of Flagstaff burned over 
twenty thousand acres while the Crooks Fire consumed over six thousand 
acres south of Prescott. After the fires were extinguished, burn scars 
have led to significant flooding issues in Flagstaff and other areas in 
northern Arizona.
    Arizonans rely on National Weather Service predictions and National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) data to predict fire 
trajectory and to determine impacts to landscapes and human health. It 
is important that NOAA and the Weather Service have the resources and 
expertise needed to predict weather and drought conditions.
    Earlier this year, NOAA launched two new supercomputers, including 
the ``Cactus'' supercomputer in Phoenix, Arizona, which operates at a 
speed of 12.1 petaflops.

    Question 1. The bipartisan infrastructure law included $80 million 
dollars for NOAA high-performance computing technology and $50 million 
for wildfire prediction, detection, and forecasting. How will these 
resources allow NOAA to improve drought and wildfire prediction 
forecasting?
    Answer. A record number of our citizens experienced extreme weather 
in this past year. These significant Federal investments will enable 
NOAA to procure research-supercomputing equipment used for weather and 
climate model development to improve drought, flood, and wildfire 
prediction, detection, and forecasting. The high performing 
supercomputing infrastructure is necessary for the long-term benefits 
of revealing the underlying correlation between climate change, 
environmental impact and natural disasters, hence contributing to our 
ability to understand the complex and large-scale ecosystem.
    NOAA plays a critical role supporting federal, state, local and 
tribal partners in preparing for the threat of wildfires and in 
battling the blazes that endanger life and property. NOAA's forecast 
products range from short-term warnings to long-term seasonal 
predictions, and include air quality and smoke forecasts related to 
wildfires. NOAA also provides real-time fire and smoke detection tools 
using new imaging capabilities from geostationary and polar orbiting 
satellites. The recently launched JPS-2 satellite will support 
essential forecasts for extreme weather events, feed daily weather 
models, and monitor climate change. Weather forecasters, first 
responders, pilots, climate scientists and fire crews will use the data 
collected by the satellites.

    STEM Education in CHIPS and Science Act: The bipartisan CHIPS and 
Science Act authorized $13 billion over five years for the National 
Science Foundation (NSF) to put towards Science, Technology, 
Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education. The legislation directs 
the NSF to explore opportunities to engage students from groups 
historically underrepresented in STEM fields as well as rural areas to 
expand the pipeline to help ensure the United States has the STEM 
workforce we need for the Twenty-First Century.

    Question 2. How will the CHIPS and Science legislation expand STEM 
education and, in turn, America's STEM workforce? Why is it important 
for Congress to fund the investments in STEM education made in the 
legislation?
    Answer. Investment in our Nation's STEM educational system is 
essential to maintain and grow our economy. STEM graduates drive 
innovation in health, clean energy, technology, aerospace and 
infrastructure, but our states' industries often turn elsewhere for 
workers because our universities cannot keep up with demand due to the 
lack of faculty, space and resources. Insufficient STEM capacity denies 
our citizens access to high-impact and high-earning careers. This 
inaccessibility is particularly acute for individuals traditionally 
underrepresented in these fields.
    A thriving economy demands a well-rounded workforce for long-term 
competitiveness. Failing to prepare our citizens for the work of the 
future compromises our country's long-term competitiveness, security 
and economic stability. To remain competitive on a global stage we must 
increase the STEM pipeline, its diversity and leverage all of our 
talent.
    Investment in America's leading research universities through the 
CHIPS and Science Act will allow talented faculty and students to 
further innovative science that will elevate the U.S. as a global 
destination for knowledge and discovery in quantum information 
sciences. These foundational investments will influence economic and 
national security, prepare U.S. students for jobs with quantum 
information technology, enhance STEM education at all levels, and 
accelerate exploration of quantum information frontiers, all while 
expanding and diversifying the talent pool for the industries of the 
future across the Nation.

    Semiconductor Investments: Once the global leader, America now only 
accounts for approximately 12 percent of the world's semiconductor 
manufacturing. Recognizing this important national security issue, I 
worked with my colleagues to ensure the CHIPS and Science Act also 
appropriated $52 billion for the Commerce Department to establish 
grants to jump-start investments in America's domestic semiconductor 
industry. These investments will support tens of thousands of Arizona 
jobs at facilities managed by Intel, TSMC, and other Arizona 
semiconductor companies.

    Question 3. How does the CHIPS and Science Act and the law's 
semiconductor investments illustrate the United States' commitment to 
being a global leader in this field and what further actions can be 
done to expand U.S. leadership in this field?
    Answer. Recognizing that the U.S. semiconductor industry's 
dependence on offshore manufacturing poses a threat to the Nation's 
long-term economic competitiveness and national security, the passage 
of the CHIPS and Science Act was critical to the development of new 
programs to promote research, development and fabrication of 
semiconductors within the U.S.
    In the past decades, Institutes of Higher Education in the U.S. 
have lost footing in semiconductor design, engineering and 
manufacturing curricula. This is because the majority of semiconductor 
manufacturing has been produced outside of the U.S. and because 
industry has been leading the field both in personnel as well as in 
technology.
    The technologies and processes required to design and manufacture 
semiconductor chips continue to become more sophisticated, requiring a 
workforce with a wider and more flexible range of STEM skills. Today 
significant gaps exist between the industry-oriented skills in demand 
and the traditional skills being supplied. A 2017 survey conducted by 
Deloitte and SEMI [3] found that 82 percent of semiconductor industry 
executives reported a shortage of qualified job candidates, and the 
challenges of finding qualified workers have increased since then, with 
gaps at all skill and education levels--from technicians to doctoral-
level engineers. The workforce needs of the industry are expected to 
more than double as the CHIPS Act manufacturing incentives in the U.S. 
will create tens of thousands of new jobs within the next few years, 
concentrated in technical and engineering roles.
    The CHIPS and Science Act is a significant investment in new 
programs to promote the research, development, and fabrication of 
semiconductors within the U.S. I ask that you continue to accelerate 
discovery through sustained and increased funding of the Federal 
agencies that enable us to remain a STEM leader on a fierce global 
landscape. Specifically, continued and additional investment to secure 
U.S. leadership in microelectronics manufacturing is needed. In 
addition, the establishment of a national network for microelectronics 
education that is open to all U.S. universities and colleges to 
participate in and that industry and government stakeholders can 
collaborate.

    [1] https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/technology/
growing-semiconductor-market.html
    [2] precedenceresearch.com/semiconductor-market
    [3] https://www.semi.org/en/workforce-development/diversity-
programs/deloitte-study
                                 ______
                                 
  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Raphael Warnock to 
                          Dr. Nancy Albritton
Workforce Diversity:
    Question 1. What is the importance of fostering greater diversity 
within America's science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 
(STEM) workforce, and to what extent would failure to diversify our 
workforce hinder our national and economic security?
    Answer. Studies have shown that diversity fosters greater outcomes 
in problem solving than monoculture groups. Diversity increases problem 
solving skills, creativity and conflict resolution. Black and Hispanic 
workers continue to be underrepresented in the STEM workforce, while 
White and Asian workers are overrepresented. STEM degrees lead to high-
impact career opportunities, which can lift up communities.
    Investment in our Nation's STEM education system is essential to 
maintain and grow our economy. STEM graduates drive innovation in 
health, clean energy, technology, aerospace and infrastructure, but our 
states' industries often turn elsewhere for workers because our 
universities cannot keep up with demand due to the lack of faculty, 
space and resources. Insufficient STEM capacity denies our citizens 
access to high-impact and high-earning careers. This inaccessibility is 
particularly acute for individuals traditionally underrepresented in 
these fields.
    A thriving economy demands a well-rounded workforce for long-term 
competitiveness. Failing to prepare our citizens for the work of the 
future compromises our country's long-term competitiveness, security 
and economic stability. To remain competitive on a global stage we must 
increase the diversity in STEM and leverage all of our talent.

    Question 2. What role do historically black colleges and 
universities (HBCUs) and other minority-serving institutions play in 
helping to build a diverse workforce? What lessons can universities and 
other institutions draw from the success of HBCUs in supporting our 
STEM workforce?
    Answer. HBCUs play an important role in building a more diverse 
workforce. A quarter of Black STEM graduates come from HBCUs. Forty-six 
percent of Black women who earned STEM degrees between 1995-2004 
graduated from HBCUs. The institutions of origin for 30 percent of 
Black graduates earning doctorates in science and engineering were 
HBCUs.
    There is a greater need for equity throughout our educational 
system and in industry hiring. HBCUs serve students who are first-
generation, low-income, and welcome people from any race to attend. 
Universities across the Nation would be well served by mirroring this 
inclusive approach and support diverse STEM students, staff and faculty 
throughout their educational and professional journeys. There are 
numerous opportunities for government, industry and academia to come 
together to create STEM career pathways for all of our citizens.

    Rural Institutions: Georgia is a proud agricultural state, and I am 
particularly excited for how advanced technologies will help improve 
precision agriculture and otherwise support America's farmers. I am 
concerned, however, by the underrepresentation of rural students and 
rural colleges and universities among America's leading research 
institutions and the effect this will have in fields such as precision 
agriculture.

    Question 3. What barriers do rural students face in entering the 
workforce in advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and 
quantum computing? How can Congress help address these barriers?
    Answer. Rural students face numerous barriers in accessing 
education that would allow them to pursue careers in advanced 
technologies. Rural schools are often disadvantaged by the way 
education funds are calculated and distributed as smaller enrollments 
result in fewer dollars. In addition, child poverty levels in rural 
areas can be double that of urban communities. Rural residents attend 
college at a lower rate than urban residents (19 percent to 35 
percent).
    The lack of financial support from the community and lack of 
visibility with private funders challenges rural schools. Urban schools 
often receive priority with grants and research to improve their 
conditions while rural schools garner less attention. Teacher pay is 
often much lower in rural areas than in urban areas and that impacts 
recruitment and retention of new and qualified teachers. Rural parental 
and community opinions of STEM education are often incongruent with the 
need for students to learn certain skills and principles of the field 
to be competitive.
    Some problems exist for rural schools to take advantage of 
supplemental government grants and funding, so Congress should be 
mindful of these potential pitfalls. For example, the Rural Education 
Achievement Program (REAP) designed to assist rural schools with 
administrative challenges in their school systems. Stipulations on fund 
use sometimes create unintended burdens (e.g., requiring that a 
percentage of the award be set aside for supplemental educational 
services, but this is a costly hardship for remotely located schools).

    Question 4. What barriers do rural colleges and universities and 
their faculties face in accessing and supporting research related 
advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and quantum 
computing? How can Congress help address these barriers?

    Global Collaboration and Competition: I have long believed that 
America must invest in innovation and advanced technologies to maintain 
our global standing. I am deeply alarmed that our global competitors, 
such as the Chinese Communist Party, have heavily invested in 
technology research and used it to oppress its own people and bolster 
autocratic regimes throughout the world. To keep America on the leading 
edge, Congress must strike the appropriate level of controls on 
innovation and intellectual property to protect our national and 
economic security without overly hindering scientific innovation and 
international collaboration.
    Answer. In a competitive global market, there is great demand for 
qualified individuals in STEM fields. Rural schools struggle to prepare 
people to compete at an early age in STEM fields. To maintain our 
economic and intellectual global leadership we must offer equal STEM 
educational opportunities to all students. Rural communities lack 
access to resources for STEM education, incongruent local values 
between local culture and economic demand, rural poverty, and gaps in 
outreach to rural communities for aid and research.
    Jobs in AI are well suited for remote work in rural areas if tools 
are accessible. AI could help address problems in rural communities 
such as the opioid crisis and crop production in farming and 
agriculture. STEM education is the foundation for lucrative careers in 
AI and data science. Expanding digital connectivity and investing in 
workforce development and government, academia and industry 
partnerships could transform local economies and reduce disparities in 
earning capacities.
    References: Maskey, S. (2021, April 13). We need to teach AI in 
rural America. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/
2021/04/13/we-need-to-teach-ai-in-rural-america/?sh=2352852e418b
    Harris, R.S. and Hodges, C.B. (2018). STEM education in rural 
schools: Implications of untapped potential. National Youth-At-Risk 
Journal, 3(1). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1269639.pdf

    Question 5. What are the key concerns that Congress should keep in 
mind as we work to achieve this balance? Please share any examples of 
Federal programs that you believe do not strike the right balance.
    Answer. Rural America is facing a maelstrom of disparities, 
exacerbated by the widening technology divide. Many rural areas lack 
reliable cost-effective energy resources. Deficient digital 
connectivity in rural areas has led to poor health and economic under-
development. We must re-think digital innovation as a process to 
reconnect and remap the economies in rural and urban areas. 
Institutions of higher education are uniquely positioned to take 
advantage of the powerful tools developed in the digital industry and 
lead a new type of digital ecosystem due to their strengths in 
fostering entrepreneurship, workforce education, collaboration with the 
private sectors and national laboratories, promoting diversity and 
inclusion and being a natural nexus to technology and society.
    I urge you to continue to invest in our Federal science agencies 
and initiatives empowered by CHIPS. Sustained Federal investment in 
these programs are essential for our Nation to remain a leader in a 
fierce global landscape, to leverage opportunities for collaboration 
between government, academic, and business sectors, and to build a 
workforce that reflects the rich diversity of our Nation.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to 
                   William B. (Trey) Breckenridge III
    Supercomputing Leadership: You noted in your testimony that the 
United States is losing its lead in high-performance computing to 
China. In 2015, the United States had nearly twice as many of the Top 
500 supercomputers as China. Today, however, China leads with 173 
supercomputers, compared to 123 in the United States. The U.S. 
Department of Energy (DOE) owns four of the top ten fastest 
supercomputers in the world according to the June 2022 Top500 list. The 
Frontier supercomputer at the DOE's Oak Ridge National Laboratory 
(ORNL) is ranked as the fastest computer in the world.\3\
    Question 1. Given that other computational capabilities are readily 
available to a broad group of industry, academic, and Government 
entities, what importance should policymakers assign to ensuring that 
the United States has access to the world's fastest supercomputers? Are 
there specific examples where the United States lacking these 
capabilities has led--or will lead--to a strategic disadvantage?
    Answer. Supercomputing access is the future of R&D in all STEM 
fields. The development of new technologies and modeling capabilities 
simply cannot happen without high performance computing capability. 
While access to supercomputing resources has significantly increased 
over the last decade or so, there is not adequate capacity in those 
systems to meet the needs of those communities utilizing them. As was 
the case when we began improving Internet connectivity, those who are 
limited in high performance computing capacity simply will be left 
behind globally to those who have the robust, high-speed tools for data 
analytics, modeling capacity, and research throughput.
    However, simply increasing HPC capacity is not sufficient to ensure 
high-end computing needs are met. While the number of systems on the 
TOP500 list is an indicator of availability of access to HPC, it is not 
an indicator of overall capability. For instance, the Frontier system 
at Oak Ridge National Laboratory has more computing capacity than the 
remaining 127 U.S. systems of the TOP500 list added together. To 
address the massive, highly complex workloads of grand challenge 
problems, such as quantum mechanics, climate change, and security, and 
to remain competitive globally in these critical areas, the U.S. must 
fund more capability-class HPC systems--systems with significantly 
higher performance than the lower 90 percent of the TOP500--and make 
these systems available to U.S. scientists and researchers.

    Compute Access: Academic institutions represented the majority of 
large-scale AI experiments from the 1960s until 2010. However, over the 
past decade the industry-academic balance has altered, with the vast 
majority of large-scale AI research being carried out by industry 
rather than academia. Private industry is leading in AI development, 
because they have the large-scale resources, and therefore the access, 
to carry out frontier AI research. Building large-scale AI models can 
cost tens of millions of dollars and require 300,000x more computing 
power than experiments conducted in the prior decade.

    Question 2. What are the specific gaps you are seeing in the 
availability of AI computing resources in industry, government, and 
academia, and to what extent do gaps differ in the regulated (e.g., 
classified) and unregulated spaces? Besides the National AI Research 
Resource, what else can the U.S. government do to catch up to private 
industry, or better collaborate with private industry, in AI 
development?
    Answer. Industry has indeed made major investments in R&D related 
to AI technologies. Funding programs should be designed that encourage 
more government-industry-academic partnerships. Rather than viewing 
them as competitors, collaboration will be critical if we are to move 
forward as a Nation in leading AI technology development and 
application.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Kyrsten Sinema to 
                   William B. (Trey) Breckenridge III
    Drought and Fire Monitoring at NOAA: Fire season began in late 
April in Arizona, as the Southwest experiences the most severe drought 
in twelve hundred years. The Tunnel Fire north of Flagstaff burned over 
twenty thousand acres while the Crooks Fire consumed over six thousand 
acres south of Prescott. After the fires were extinguished, burn scars 
have led to significant flooding issues in Flagstaff and other areas in 
northern Arizona.
    Arizonans rely on National Weather Service predictions and National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) data to predict fire 
trajectory and to determine impacts to landscapes and human health. It 
is important that NOAA and the Weather Service have the resources and 
expertise needed to predict weather and drought conditions.
    Earlier this year, NOAA launched two new supercomputers, including 
the ``Cactus'' supercomputer in Phoenix, Arizona, which operates at a 
speed of 12.1 petaflops.

    Question 1. The bipartisan infrastructure law included $80 million 
dollars for NOAA high-performance computing technology and $50 million 
for wildfire prediction, detection, and forecasting. How will these 
resources allow NOAA to improve drought and wildfire prediction 
forecasting?
    Answer. High performance computing is critical to improve wildfire 
and drought forecasting. As modeling capabilities improve, the need for 
computational speed goes up exponentially. Our capacity to generate 
data to improve models and the accuracy thereof can be greatly limited 
if research does not have the computational capacity to develop and 
adequately use the data generated. In the same way, operational models 
require near real-time processing if predictions are to be relevant.

    STEM Education in CHIPS and Science Act: The bipartisan CHIPS and 
Science Act authorized $13 billion over five years for the National 
Science Foundation (NSF) to put towards Science, Technology, 
Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education. The legislation directs 
the NSF to explore opportunities to engage students from groups 
historically underrepresented in STEM fields as well as rural areas to 
expand the pipeline to help ensure the United States has the STEM 
workforce we need for the Twenty-First Century.

    Question 2. How will the CHIPS and Science legislation expand STEM 
education and, in turn, America's STEM workforce? Why is it important 
for Congress to fund the investments in STEM education made in the 
legislation?
    Answer. The CHIPS and Science legislation provides an opportunity 
for substantial increase in NSF funding at critical juncture. Other 
countries have made major advances in STEM areas, and if the U.S. is to 
regain its leadership role investments like this are crucial. 
Importantly, funds are set aside in this legislation to ensure that 
more institutions in more states are able to participate. This will 
allow many, many more students to work in NSF-funded projects, 
broadening participation and recognizing that workforce development in 
STEM fields is critical throughout the Nation, and not just in a few 
states.

    Semiconductor Investments: Once the global leader, America now only 
accounts for approximately 12 percent of the world's semiconductor 
manufacturing. Recognizing this important national security issue, I 
worked with my colleagues to ensure the CHIPS and Science Act also 
appropriated $52 billion for the Commerce Department to establish 
grants to jump-start investments in America's domestic semiconductor 
industry. These investments will support tens of thousands of Arizona 
jobs at facilities managed by Intel, TSMC, and other Arizona 
semiconductor companies.

    Question 3. How does the CHIPS and Science Act and the law's 
semiconductor investments illustrate the United States' commitment to 
being a global leader in this field and what further actions can be 
done to expand U.S. leadership in this field?
    Answer. The funding commitments that the CHIPS and Science 
legislation makes is a bold statement globally about the U.S. 
commitment to leadership in STEM fields. In addition, the funding 
recognizes the critical national security needs in onshore chip 
manufacturing. Investments in research and ensuring the environment for 
onshore manufacturing for the development of new technologies will be 
critical to ensure that the U.S. adequately addresses these national 
security needs. In particular, additional actions should be taken to 
ensure companies have access to capital for the manufacturing 
investments necessary as well as a trained workforce capable of meeting 
the demands from this added manufacturing capacity.
                                 ______
                                 
  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Raphael Warnock to 
                   William B. (Trey) Breckenridge III
    Workforce Diversity:

    Question 1. What is the importance of fostering greater diversity 
within America's science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 
(STEM) workforce, and to what extent would failure to diversify our 
workforce hinder our national and economic security?
    Answer. Our Nation is founded on the principle of freedom and 
opportunity for all. We cannot afford to see a lack of diversity in 
STEM fields if we are to achieve our potential. We as a country cannot 
be successful if we in fact leave a segment of our population behind in 
technology development.

    Question 2. What role do historically black colleges and 
universities (HBCUs) and other minority-serving institutions play in 
helping to build a diverse workforce? What lessons can universities and 
other institutions draw from the success of HBCUs in supporting our 
STEM workforce?
    Answer. HBCUs and MSIs have historically played a vital role in 
ensuring higher education opportunities for all citizens of the US. As 
STEM fields evolve, collaboration between all institutions will be even 
more important than in the past. HBCUs and MSIs, in particular 
partnering with other research universities, will have exceptional 
opportunities to ensure that research funding and workforce development 
is broad across all demographics within the U.S.

    Rural Institutions: Georgia is a proud agricultural state, and I am 
particularly excited for how advanced technologies will help improve 
precision agriculture and otherwise support America's farmers. I am 
concerned, however, by the underrepresentation of rural students and 
rural colleges and universities among America's leading research 
institutions and the effect this will have in fields such as precision 
agriculture.

    Question 3. What barriers do rural students face in entering the 
workforce in advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and 
quantum computing? How can Congress help address these barriers?
    Answer. So much of the research funding in recent years has gone to 
a few institutions in a few states, thereby limiting access to 
undergraduate and graduate research opportunities across the Nation. 
The CHIPS and Science legislation has provided important safeguards to 
ensure that funding is provided more broadly to rural and 
underrepresented populations. This legislation ensures that quality 
will not be lessened, but many more students will have access to these 
resources so that we as a Nation can grow across the entire country.

    Question 4. What barriers do rural colleges and universities and 
their faculties face in accessing and supporting research related 
advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and quantum 
computing? How can Congress help address these barriers?
    Answer. Access to funding has been difficult for a variety of 
reasons, including perceptions of quality, lack of research 
infrastructure, lack of state investment, and higher demands on faculty 
at institutions with less funding. In particular, a need exists to 
invest more resources in equipment and research infrastructure if rural 
colleges and universities are to be successful in R&D activities.

    Global Collaboration and Competition: I have long believed that 
America must invest in innovation and advanced technologies to maintain 
our global standing. I am deeply alarmed that our global competitors, 
such as the Chinese Communist Party, have heavily invested in 
technology research and used it to oppress its own people and bolster 
autocratic regimes throughout the world. To keep America on the leading 
edge, Congress must strike the appropriate level of controls on 
innovation and intellectual property to protect our national and 
economic security without overly hindering scientific innovation and 
international collaboration.

    Question 5. What are the key concerns that Congress should keep in 
mind as we work to achieve this balance? Please share any examples of 
Federal programs that you believe do not strike the right balance.
    Answer. Investments in research within the U.S. is a critical step, 
and Congress is to be applauded for the CHIPS and Science legislation 
that will be a major step forward in ensuring national competitiveness. 
I believe Congress has done a very good job in striking the right 
balance between controlling and stimulating innovation. While recent 
policies restricting access to R&D to foreign entities have been 
difficult to implement, I recognize the critical need for these steps. 
However, funding to cover the added costs of these controls and 
restrictions are born by individual universities, and additional 
Federal funds are critically needed if rural universities are to remain 
competitive.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to 
                             Dr. Bob Sutor
    QIS Technical Challenges: CHIPS and Science has authorized National 
Institute of Standards and Technology funding for research and 
development of quantum cryptography and post-quantum classical 
cryptography standards, as well as quantum networking, communications, 
and sensing technologies. By studying these fields, we can understand 
the impacts of quantum information sciences on cybersecurity, secure 
communications, and medical devices.

    Question 1. What are the main technical challenges facing the 
quantum information science field, and how can the United States 
Government help meet those challenges?
    Answer. The primary challenge for quantum computing systems is 
building large and powerful enough systems. We often measure ``large 
enough'' in terms of the number of qubits, but this is not a good 
metric. Having many error-prone qubits is not necessarily better than 
having fewer qubits with higher fidelity. The quantum programming model 
requires that qubits be connected to create entanglement. We will 
likely need hundreds of thousands of qubits arranged in arrays of 
interconnected quantum cores that can operate at very low error rates 
for application to the promised use cases in AI, optimization, and 
simulation of physical systems. We need breakthroughs in physics, 
engineering, and manufacturing to get there.
    Another challenge facing quantum computing is that its programming 
is not a simple variation or extension of how we code software for 
classical applications. The model is entirely different and requires 
new training materials and courses. In my book, Dancing with Python, I 
show how this integrated approach can teach students, even at the high 
school level, to start understanding and coding quantum algorithms. We 
need national STEM programs to make quantum software development 
pervasive throughout our computer science curricula.
    We can also make physics education more accessible via the cloud. 
Quantum sensors work by detecting subtle effects and variations in 
atomic configurations. This allows us to determine changes in speed, 
rotation in three dimensions, and gravity. With this technology, we can 
also build high-resolution atomic clocks and Radio Frequency receivers 
for consumer, military, and intelligence use. We need to train more 
students at the university level to move from the theoretical aspects 
of quantum computing to applied quantum engineering. Quantum matter 
machines, such as the quantum emulator named Albert from ColdQuanta, 
can give students a hands-on cloud-based interactive platform for 
experimenting with the physical processes at the core of quantum 
sensors. Just as quantum computing was jump-started in 2016 when the 
first system was put on the cloud, we can do the same to accelerate 
skills development for quantum sensors and other devices.
    A major issue facing America's quantum industry is supply chain. 
Many essential enabling technologies for quantum technology are 
available only from a handful of vendors, many of which are overseas. 
For example, ColdQuanta's cold atom approach to quantum computing uses 
many different laser systems to trap, cool, and manipulate atoms. These 
are very specialized lasers, with only a few vendors offering systems 
with the necessary requirements. Sometimes we have to build our own 
laser systems in-house to meet our needs. Another key enabling 
technology that will allow quantum technology to become much more 
compact is Photonic Integrated Circuits or PICs. This technology is to 
light what microchips are to electronics; with a PIC, you can build an 
entire photonic system on a chip.
    We must support a robust domestic supply chain. We cannot afford to 
allow quantum and quantum-enabling manufacturing to go overseas. To 
avoid that, we need to invest now in small, domestic manufacturers, 
building that supply chain and providing high-paying jobs for 
Americans.

    Overcoming Valley of Death: You mentioned in your testimony that 
the U.S. Government's investment in quantum startups is scattered, 
without support for integration into deployed systems of record. The 
CHIPS and Science Act specifically aimed to help accelerate startup 
development, including through entrepreneurial fellowships, testbeds, 
and demonstration projects within the National Science Foundation 
Technology and Innovation Partnerships directorate.

    Question 2. What specific policy recommendations do you have to 
improve U.S. investment in startups to help them cross the ``valley of 
death''? From your perspective, do quantum and AI technologies face 
unique challenges, such as greater capital investment that ought to be 
addressed?
    Answer. The ``valley of death'' concerning quantum startups and 
manufacturers is the gap between prototyping/low-volume production and 
high-volume production. Hardware typically requires greater and longer-
term investment than software because of the prototype, development, 
and product cycle, together with supply chain fulfillment issues and 
delays. In addition, it will be several years, perhaps five to ten, 
until we have powerful enough quantum computers for our intended 
applications. The venture capital and general investment community may 
not have the patience to wait that long for their ROI.
    Statistically, 90 percent of all startup companies in the U.S. 
fail. It is essential that promising small and medium-sized companies 
within the quantum ecosystem be supported until they can reach 
manufacturing scale and profitability for this technology that will be 
so important for our country's economic success and security.
    Some of this support can come in the form described in our response 
to your Question 3: departments and agencies should not penalize 
contractors for accepting cost and schedule risk for the inclusion of 
highly promising quantum solutions, given the strategic importance to 
the Nation of accelerating the development and maturation of this high-
payoff technology.
    It is also critical that any legislation maintains quantum 
technology neutrality. At this exciting stage of technological 
development, there is a diversity of quantum modalities. To make 
quantum systems, people use atoms, ions, superconducting systems, 
nitrogen vacancies, photons, and more. While we at ColdQuanta believe 
that the neutral atom approach is the surest bet, we, as an industry, 
are still determining which modality will deliver the first fully 
functional and error-corrected quantum computer. In the case of quantum 
computing, if we need hundreds of thousands of qubits for practical 
quantum advantage, we are years away from declaring winners and losers. 
The best technology today only has dozens or a few hundred qubits. If 
the United States government were to pick a ``winner'' quantum 
modality, it would be a significant gamble and risk crippling promising 
technologies that are not yet fully developed. Supporting all 
modalities equally is the best way to ensure a robust and productive 
quantum ecosystem where development can be accelerated.

    National Quantum Initiative:

    Question 3. What goals should the Committee consider in 
reauthorizing the National Quantum Initiative?
    Answer. Congress and the Administration have taken significant and 
very wise initial steps to recognize the power and potential of quantum 
science and engineering advancement and the out-sized role such 
progress will have for all aspects of our society. The bipartisan 
National Quantum Initiative Act of 2018 was an excellent step requiring 
a government plan to accelerate quantum science and engineering 
development in a coordinated and strategic fashion.
    Four areas that would be valuable for the Committee to consider are 
workforce development, manufacturing support, more centralized 
organization of quantum programs within the government, and streamlined 
acquisition processes that encourage quantum technological development.
    The quantum industry is growing rapidly, and its workforce needs to 
grow with it. To encourage students to pursue careers in the quantum 
industry, we need to make quantum education more accessible. Offering 
funding to high schools and community colleges to develop quantum 
educational programs, particularly with affordable access to cloud-
based quantum computers and quantum matter machines, will ensure that 
students get early exposure to quantum science. Students studying 
quantum-related fields could be offered scholarships, and workers who 
spend several years within the quantum industry, particularly for 
technician-level jobs, could be offered loan forgiveness to encourage 
their participation in the quantum workforce.
    In the interest of economic growth and national security, we urge 
the Committee to take steps to support a robust domestic supply chain. 
By investing in small, domestic manufacturers, we can build that secure 
supply chain and provide high-paying jobs for Americans.
    We also urge the Committee to continue its leadership role by 
encouraging key government departments and agencies to move more 
quickly to tailor internal organizational practices in recognition of 
the critical strategic importance of quantum development. Departments 
and agencies must move swiftly and decisively to adopt detailed program 
planning, budgeting, and program acquisition policies/procedures to 
accelerate quantum-based technology advancement. This includes creating 
a centralized system to plan, track, monitor, assess, and ensure high 
payoff developments are sufficiently resourced for all viable quantum 
science R&D projects across the Department/agency enterprise. It also 
entails the establishment of effective mechanisms for Federal agencies 
to share/coordinate quantum R&D activity plans and results to maximize 
the speed and quality of quantum development.
    We urge the Committee also to consider legislation to encourage 
departments and agencies to modify their program acquisition procedures 
expressly to allow for the insertion of viable quantum technology 
solutions. Since we are early in the quantum technology development 
cycle, prime contractors should not be penalized or discouraged for 
proposing to accept higher risk/higher reward quantum technology 
solutions in the acquisition selection and contract negotiation 
processes. Departments and agencies should not penalize contractors for 
accepting cost and schedule risk for the inclusion of highly promising 
quantum solutions, given the strategic importance to the Nation of 
accelerating the development and maturation of this high-payoff 
technology.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Kyrsten Sinema to 
                             Dr. Bob Sutor
    STEM Education in CHIPS and Science Act: The bipartisan CHIPS and 
Science Act authorized $13 billion over five years for the National 
Science Foundation (NSF) to put towards Science, Technology, 
Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education. The legislation directs 
the NSF to explore opportunities to engage students from groups 
historically underrepresented in STEM fields as well as rural areas to 
expand the pipeline to help ensure the United States has the STEM 
workforce we need for the Twenty-First Century.

    Question 1. How will the CHIPS and Science legislation expand STEM 
education and, in turn, America's STEM workforce? Why is it important 
for Congress to fund the investments in STEM education made in the 
legislation?
    Answer. The provisions in the CHIPS and Science legislation will go 
a long way toward strengthening and diversifying America's STEM 
education and workforce. These provisions will require Federal agencies 
and universities to identify and lower barriers to the recruitment, 
retention, and advancement of women, minorities, and other 
underrepresented groups in STEM. They will also require much-needed 
data collection on the demographics of the STEM workforce, provide 
insights on reasons for poor recruitment and retention, and inform best 
practices for making the STEM workforce inclusive. Funding these 
provisions will yield valuable gains in the development of our STEM 
workforce and accelerate its diversification.
    We agree with the provisions and requirements in the Chips and 
Science Act--Title V: Broadening Participation in Science document at 
https://science.house.gov/imo/media/doc/STEM 
percent20Participation.pdf.

    Semiconductor Investments: Once the global leader, America now only 
accounts for approximately 12 percent of the world's semiconductor 
manufacturing. Recognizing this important national security issue, I 
worked with my colleagues to ensure the CHIPS and Science Act also 
appropriated $52 billion for the Commerce Department to establish 
grants to jump-start investments in America's domestic semiconductor 
industry. These investments will support tens of thousands of Arizona 
jobs at facilities managed by Intel, TSMC, and other Arizona 
semiconductor companies.

    Question 2. How does the CHIPS and Science Act and the law's 
semiconductor investments illustrate the United States' commitment to 
being a global leader in this field and what further actions can be 
done to expand U.S. leadership in this field?
    Answer. The CHIPS and Science Act takes bold and critical steps 
towards re-establishing a robust domestic semiconductor supply chain. 
Recent chip shortages have affected consumer goods, from cars to 
computers, mainly due to reliance on a highly homogenous, overseas 
supply chain. Investing in our domestic capacity to produce 
semiconductors will strengthen our national security, limit the 
economic distress that can result from supply chain problems, and, as 
you aptly note, create many high-paying tech jobs for Americans. But we 
should not stop there.
    Many quantum enabling technologies are only available from a few 
small vendors, and many of those vendors are overseas. For our national 
security and economic growth, we must develop a robust domestic quantum 
supply chain by investing in small domestic manufacturers.
    It is important to note that many quantum technologies are not 
packaged as ``chips.'' While semiconductors are used in the control 
systems for cold atoms, ion traps, and photonic quantum devices, the 
computer or sensor may be within a glass cell, with lasers performing 
many functions.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ray Ben Lujan to 
                             Dr. Bob Sutor
    Development of Quantum Sensors: Dr. Sutor, you noted in your 
testimony that sensors are a near-term application of quantum 
technologies. You cite inertial sensors and clocks as particularly 
useful implementations that soon could be fielded and commercialized. 
Our National Laboratories are leaders in the field of quantum 
engineering. For example, Sandia's Quantum Information Program has 
improved our understanding and mastery of quantum systems, enabling 
cutting edge sensor systems. Congress dedicated significant resources 
to the expansion of quantum technologies in the CHIPS and Science Act.

    Question 1. Yes or No, should we be leveraging our National Lab's 
assets and expertise to rapidly mature and commercialize these emerging 
technologies?
    Answer. Yes.

    Question 2. How can we better support public-private partnerships 
to accelerate the development of promising sensing applications?
    Answer. We urge the Committee to consider legislation to encourage 
departments and agencies to modify their program acquisition procedures 
expressly to allow for the insertion of viable quantum technology 
solutions. Since we are early in the quantum technology development 
cycle, prime contractors should not be penalized or discouraged for 
proposing to accept higher risk/higher reward quantum technology 
solutions in the acquisition selection and contract negotiation 
processes. Departments and agencies should not penalize contractors for 
accepting cost and schedule risk for the inclusion of highly promising 
quantum solutions, given the strategic importance to the Nation of 
accelerating the development and maturation of this high-payoff 
technology.
    We should specifically look at how the public-private partnerships 
can accelerate the time from prototype to system-of-record for higher-
precision atomic clocks, inertial sensors, and Radio Frequency 
receivers. It's not enough to develop the individual components and 
sub-components of quantum computers, quantum sensors, and quantum 
communication equipment. The partnerships should aim to create complete 
solutions that can be quickly commercialized.
    The most critical gap in the development of quantum sensing 
applications is the scalable manufacture and assembly of these complete 
systems. The manufacture of the core photonic and quantum components 
has been demonstrated, and the assembly technologies are available. An 
ideal, shovel-ready public-private partnership is to build out these 
demonstrated capabilities as a flexible, for-profit service. The 
service will support the critical manufacturing needs of the quantum 
sensor industry as it develops while producing the core assemblies for 
commercial quantum products.

    Question 3. Where do you anticipate that quantum sensors may be 
most useful? You cite GPS systems as a vulnerability that could be 
mitigated using quantum sensors. Would these efforts make our Nation 
more secure?
    Answer. Quantum technology will give us next-generation navigation 
with the highest possible precision. There is no scale of resolution 
finer than quantum. Our current GPS has several weaknesses. GPS signals 
can be affected by weather and other atmospheric conditions. More 
significant problems, especially for those concerned with security, are 
``GPS jamming'' or ``denial,'' where a signal is turned into noise, or 
``GPS spoofing,'' where a valid signal is replaced by a stronger and 
nefariously incorrect one. You don't want to be on a plane that thinks 
it is hundreds of miles away from its actual location. This practice is 
known and common in war zones, and denial or spoofing of GPS in a major 
city could snarl much of its transportation with apparent implications 
for safety and commerce.
    Financial transactions and cellular and power infrastructure are 
dependent on GPS. Financial transactions across networks use GPS for 
timestamping. Accuracy is essential in high-speed applications to know 
the exact sequence of transactions. Cellular base stations can use GPS 
to synchronize their times to use the broadband spectrum more 
precisely. Power networks are complicated these days, with multiple 
energy sources and, often, bidirectional flow. Time synchronization 
from GPS is used in some grids to optimize and balance electricity 
distribution.
    Quantum atomic clocks combined with quantum inertial sensors will 
be able to provide what is, in effect, onboard dead reckoning. There 
will be no need to connect to satellites or external sources that can 
be blocked or manipulated. We will likely migrate to this kind of 
quantum-based solution for PNT--Positioning, Navigation, and Timing. 
This technology will be useful to the warfighter and make our Nation 
more secure; the military and defense will most likely be the first 
users of these solutions. But, like GPS, businesses will be able to 
develop commercial products, and we could use them in our everyday 
lives, such as in fully autonomous self-driving cars that cannot lose 
signal in tunnels or bad weather.
    Quantum atomic clocks are already used today in GPS satellites, and 
they will eventually become pervasive elsewhere as they become smaller 
and less expensive. They will appear in our network, cloud data 
centers, cell phone towers, ATMs, planes, and ships, as well as in our 
cars and phones. Not only will they operate independently or in 
ensembles and be highly accurate, but they will also maintain that 
accuracy for weeks or months before resynchronizing.
    Beyond PNT, quantum sensors will have many uses that will make our 
Nation more secure. For example, quantum Radio Frequency (RF) sensors 
are significantly more sensitive than traditional ones and will enable 
warfighters to detect RF signals that are undetectable today. We can 
even measure gravity fluctuations with quantum gravimeters. These can 
determine changes in the earth's density and help discover new 
resources. Other applications include safety and recovery operations, 
such as finding voids in building collapses after an earthquake, or, 
more salient to national security, discovering underground structures 
or tunnels that adversaries may have constructed out of sight. We might 
even get early alerts for natural disasters such as landslides and 
sinkholes.
                                 ______
                                 
  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Raphael Warnock to 
                             Dr. Bob Sutor
Workforce Diversity:
    Question 1. What is the importance of fostering greater diversity 
within America's science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 
(STEM) workforce, and to what extent would failure to diversify our 
workforce hinder our national and economic security?
    Answer. The workforce needs of the quantum industry are growing as 
rapidly as the industry is. To meet these needs, we cannot afford to 
overlook people of talent who have been historically underrepresented 
in quantum physics, particularly women and people of color. Embracing 
all forms of diversity as we grow the quantum workforce will not only 
maximize the pool of talent but having a diverse workforce is highly 
beneficial in the workplace in terms of productivity, creativity, and 
problem-solving. ColdQuanta is dedicated to building a diverse quantum 
workforce with internal education efforts to ensure we provide a highly 
inclusive work environment and external efforts aimed toward equitable 
recruitment and hiring practices. Diversity is an important value that 
will make our domestic quantum workforce stronger and more competitive 
globally.
    The United States needs the best talent to compete economically and 
ensure that we always have the most advanced technology for our 
national security. The coming quantum era will require a broad range of 
skills, talents, and backgrounds to secure our success. We commonly 
hear about academic and industrial research results from those with 
doctorates. For quantum to become pervasive and practical, we need 
hardware and software engineers, technicians, and manufacturing 
workers. Quantum and classical computing will co-exist. While some 
people working in traditional computing will develop quantum skills, we 
should primarily consider the new talent we need for the very different 
aspects of quantum. Our needs will only add to whatever shortcomings we 
have now. Those needs are diverse, as must be the people who fulfill 
them.

    Question 2. What role do historically black colleges and 
universities (HBCUs) and other minority-serving institutions play in 
helping to build a diverse workforce? What lessons can universities and 
other institutions draw from the success of HBCUs in supporting our 
STEM workforce?
    Answer. According to a 2019 paper in the Educational Researcher 
journal,\1\ ``STEM is the only field where Black and Latina/o youth are 
significantly more likely than their White peers to switch and earn a 
degree in another field.'' Since quantum technology is so different 
from its classical counterpart, now is the time to remedy the STEM 
disparity regarding diversity and inclusion. We have a new opportunity 
to ``do it right.'' We can build a diverse workforce in a novel 
industry, close the STEM participation gaps for quantum, and keep 
people in the field. Quantum is not just physics: its study includes 
mathematics, computer science, chemistry, and engineering, and it has 
applications in AI, materials science, logistics, finance, and any 
field that uses optimization techniques. HBCUs can teach quantum as a 
multidisciplinary field that better reflects the broad range of jobs 
that will be available in the industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ ``Does STEM Stand Out? Examining Racial/Ethnic Gaps in 
Persistence Across Postsecondary Fields.'' https://
journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.3102/0013189X19831006?journalCode=edra
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Providing a high standard of quantum education does not need to be 
burdensome in terms of time or resources for the faculty offering it. 
Students, professors, and researchers can access quantum computers and 
emulators via the cloud. There is no need to install a quantum system 
locally. For example, ColdQuanta will offer quantum matter machines and 
quantum computers on the cloud. With them, users will be able to create 
ultra-cold quantum matter or perform quantum calculations remotely. 
Further, much of the software for using quantum computers is open 
source, such as Cirq and Qiskit. The essential resources for learning 
about and using quantum computers are available from our rural areas to 
our biggest cities.

    Rural Institutions: Georgia is a proud agricultural state, and I am 
particularly excited for how advanced technologies will help improve 
precision agriculture and otherwise support America's farmers. I am 
concerned, however, by the underrepresentation of rural students and 
rural colleges and universities among America's leading research 
institutions and the effect this will have in fields such as precision 
agriculture.

    Question 3. What barriers do rural students face in entering the 
workforce in advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and 
quantum computing? How can Congress help address these barriers?
    Answer. Access is a significant barrier to entry for the rural 
student. In the past, to do quantum science or receive quantum 
education, you had to be physically present in a laboratory, but not 
anymore. The remote availability of quantum computers and emulators via 
the cloud makes quantum science much more accessible. Open-source 
software and online courses make it easier for the rural student to 
learn quantum science and for faculty at rural institutions to offer 
such education.
    Internships are crucial to getting practical experience and 
demonstrating proficiency in STEM areas like AI and quantum. During the 
pandemic, many internship programs were virtual, and students could 
participate from anywhere. Now, fewer remote internships are available, 
and there is often an assumption that face-to-face is required. In some 
cases, such as hardware, one must be where the facilities are. For 
software, while ``back to the office'' may be advantageous, it has 
disadvantages for those who cannot travel.
    Congress can help address the barriers for rural students by:

   ensuring equitable cloud access to quantum computers and 
        emulators for students, faculty, and researchers,

   ensuring that U.S. government labs and agencies offer 
        virtual options for internships whenever possible,

   fully reimbursing students for all reasonable travel and 
        living expenses when temporary relocation for an internship is 
        necessary,

   offering scholarships for students who choose to pursue 
        quantum education and loan forgiveness for students who go to 
        work in the quantum industry; and

   encouraging commercial organizations to consider students 
        from a broad range of geographic locations.

    While K-12 curricula are usually in the domain of the states, 
education on quantum technologies and data science should extend 
downward into high schools. National educational standards for the 
technologies most important to our economic and security interests 
should be considered. High schools in rural areas should be supported 
by training educators and giving students low-cost access to learning 
materials and cloud-based technology.

    Question 4. What barriers do rural colleges and universities and 
their faculties face in accessing and supporting research-related 
advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and quantum 
computing? How can Congress help address these barriers?
    Answer. A significant barrier for rural institutions and faculties 
is cost. To become proficient in and help develop leading-edge 
technology, one must have access to leading-edge technology. State-of-
the-art research and graduate work in physics and engineering require 
investment in the equipment necessary. However, establishing and fully 
equipping a quantum science laboratory is time-consuming and expensive. 
With cloud-based solutions, this is not always necessary, and many of 
these costs can be avoided and time saved. Congress must ensure that 
access to cloud-based AI and quantum computing software is available 
and funded for research and education at rural institutions. Congress 
can also direct agencies like the National Science Foundation to fund 
quantum projects and equipment and develop quantum programming at rural 
schools.
    Another possibility is to institute a more aggressive ``rotating 
scholar'' program where professors and researchers from less rural and 
academically higher-ranked institutions visit the rural colleges and 
universities for at least one term. These visiting positions exist 
today but could be increased five to tenfold to accelerate AI, quantum 
research, and education at rural institutions.

    Global Collaboration and Competition: I have long believed that 
America must invest in innovation and advanced technologies to maintain 
our global standing. I am deeply alarmed that our global competitors, 
such as the Chinese Communist Party, have heavily invested in 
technology research and used it to oppress its own people and bolster 
autocratic regimes throughout the world. To keep America on the leading 
edge, Congress must strike the appropriate level of controls on 
innovation and intellectual property to protect our national and 
economic security without overly hindering scientific innovation and 
international collaboration.

    Question 5. What are the key concerns that Congress should keep in 
mind as we work to achieve this balance? Please share any examples of 
Federal programs that you believe do not strike the right balance.
    Answer. I agree that striking the right balance is critical. At one 
extreme, some could say, ``control everything that might pose a threat 
anywhere in its future development.'' At the other extreme, some might 
want to sell as much as possible to anyone who wants a technology to 
reap the economic benefits. But neither extreme makes sense, and you 
are correct that as we develop export controls as a nation, we need to 
find the sweet spot or the natural balance point.
    In the case of quantum computing technology, we can ask, ``how 
large and powerful a quantum computing machine can we sell 
internationally without endangering our national security?''. It's not 
an easy question to answer. Academics and industrial researchers are 
starting to build quantum computers from various core qubit 
technologies, including cold atoms, ion traps, superconducting, and 
photonics. There are seven or eight characteristics that play off 
against each other and make it difficult to know which approach will 
ultimately be best to scale for which supplication. To enable and 
support a diverse and productive quantum ecosystem, Congress must 
ensure that U.S. Government support does not favor one of these 
technologies over another because a lack of neutrality could 
preemptively stall valuable technological advances.
    We are beginning to understand how large and ``good'' a quantum 
computer will need to be to break encryption, a possible eventual 
threat to cybersecurity. Less well understood is how we will connect 
small quantum ``cores'' with hundreds to thousands of qubits to create 
systems with hundreds of thousands of qubits. This problem is 
challenging because adding more qubits is unlike adding more memory to 
a laptop, for example. One doesn't just plug in a hundred more qubits 
to get a more powerful system.
    In its deliberations on future legislation, such as the renewal of 
the 2018 National Quantum Initiative, Congress must call out the need 
for domestic development of these ``quantum interconnects'' between 
cores. Additionally, this legislation should call out the need for R & 
D to understand how several quantum computers might be networked to 
create larger systems that could defeat the intent of export controls.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to 
                        Henry L. Jones II, Ph.D.
    Question. In your written testimony, you emphasize the need to 
attract more diverse people into STEM, including through industry 
certifications. What workforce difficulties did you see at your company 
and what more can universities do to relieve these issues?
    Answer. For companies like mine that were competing and growing in 
global technology markets, the most significant obstacle to success was 
finding, recruiting, signing, and keeping exceptionally talented 
technology experts. Capability and availability were the most important 
decision factors by far. Diversity was a highly desirable outcome, but 
was hampered by our market realities--we would take the qualified hires 
we could get.
    In addition, many companies have internal programs to improve 
recruiting by giving bonuses to its employees who can bring in a 
capable hire. This practice tends to result in a workforce with self-
reinforcing demographics, which can significantly impact diversity over 
time, especially when compounded with the experience these employees 
gain by their initial employment.
    Finally, I noticed that often the applicants from communities of 
color did not appear to have had opportunities to develop an impressive 
work portfolio and useful experience while a student. Rather than 
working as an intern applying their newly learned technical skills, 
they had been filling non-technical roles as work study students in 
university administration offices making copies and shuttling mail 
around campus.
    The most successful solution that I have is seen for these 
difficulties was our creation of a standing internship and work/study 
co-op program with nearby universities to connect high potential 
juniors and seniors. This allowed the university and my company to 
engage students very early in their educational process, to connect 
them to role models, to give them insight into the utility of their 
classes, and to give them solid work experience to include in their 
portfolios to present to future employers. We usually brought these 
students in as full-time employees after graduation, but even those 
that we did not eventually employ presented positive experiences for 
the students and for our company.
    Congress could dramatically increase the impact of such programs by 
providing cost-share frameworks, creating matchmaking resources, and 
supporting any efforts to educate parents in communities of color of 
the potential of technical careers for their children and the steps 
along the path to get them there.
                                 ______
                                 
   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Kyrsten Sinema to 
                        Henry L. Jones II, Ph.D.
    STEM Education in CHIPS and Science Act: The bipartisan CHIPS and 
Science Act authorized $13 billion over five years for the National 
Science Foundation (NSF) to put towards Science, Technology, 
Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) education. The legislation directs 
the NSF to explore opportunities to engage students from groups 
historically underrepresented in STEM fields as well as rural areas to 
expand the pipeline to help ensure the United States has the STEM 
workforce we need for the Twenty-First Century.

    Question 1. How will the CHIPS and Science legislation expand STEM 
education and, in turn, America's STEM workforce? Why is it important 
for Congress to fund the investments in STEM education made in the 
legislation?
    Answer. Rural students are generally unlikely to have direct 
exposure to cutting-edge technologies and are even less likely to learn 
the methods by which they are developed. This exposure comes from 
visits to high-tech companies, presentations by role models in their 
communities, and projects that give them hands-on experience with the 
related tools and concepts. The CHIPS and Science legislation is of 
interest to rural states' workforce and industry development because 
the expertise areas of individuals, academic teams, and companies that 
are needed to create advanced new products and services in rural areas 
will be uncommon.
    Congress could help address these barriers by supporting activities 
that provide educational opportunities to students and to their parents 
regarding the career potential of these advanced technologies. Congress 
should also ensure that some of the societal and economic forces that 
lead to centralization of innovation--personnel and equipment and 
infrastructure--are not explicitly or implicitly reinforced by its 
policies. The component of the CHIPS Act that emphasizes the 
participation of EPSCoR states in the regional technology hubs is an 
excellent example of what Congress can do to provide long-term 
investment in rural-oriented development of advanced technologies. 
Support for workforce development in rural communities focused on 
developing and keeping opportunities for advanced technology-related 
employment is also something Congress should continue to make a 
priority.

    Semiconductor Investments: Once the global leader, America now only 
accounts for approximately 12 percent of the world's semiconductor 
manufacturing. Recognizing this important national security issue, I 
worked with my colleagues to ensure the CHIPS and Science Act also 
appropriated $52 billion for the Commerce Department to establish 
grants to jump-start investments in America's domestic semiconductor 
industry. These investments will support tens of thousands of Arizona 
jobs at facilities managed by Intel, TSMC, and other Arizona 
semiconductor companies.

    Question 2. How does the CHIPS and Science Act and the law's 
semiconductor investments illustrate the United States' commitment to 
being a global leader in this field and what further actions can be 
done to expand U.S. leadership in this field?
    Answer. The economic drivers that led to the global distribution of 
semiconductor expertise and facilities are significantly impacted by 
national and international agreements for trade and intellectual 
property protection. The CHIPS and Science Act is a substantial action 
by the United States to recognize this reality, and to take steps to 
set long-term conditions towards a healthy domestic semiconductor 
industry.
    One area in which Congress might take additional action could be 
the sensitive issue of immigration, particularly how we attract, 
welcome, and keep the most innovative and energetic individuals, 
companies, and communities from around the global semiconductor 
industry as American citizens--to integrate them instead of competing 
with them. Many of our most successful technology companies (e.g., 
Google) were created by immigrants. Rural areas have very low cost of 
living and excellent telecommunications and transport connectivity. 
Congress would be wise to implement immigration policies that encourage 
global entrepreneurs to move to rural areas.
                                 ______
                                 
  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Raphael Warnock to 
                        Henry L. Jones II, Ph.D.
Workforce Diversity:
    Question 1. What is the importance of fostering greater diversity 
within America's science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 
(STEM) workforce, and to what extent would failure to diversify our 
workforce hinder our national and economic security?
    Answer. While the wisdom of diversity is commonplace in investment 
circles--the positive economics inherent in diverse portfolios are well 
known (even warranting a Nobel Prize for Harry Markowitz)--this same 
insight has only recently been recognized by U.S. technology industry 
decision makers. Whether the concern is how a lack of diversity might 
make the company and its workforce pipeline more fragile by ``putting 
all its eggs in one (or just a few) baskets,'' or through the blindness 
to potential threats and opportunities due to a limited set of 
perspectives, I have witnessed a complete change in mindset over my 
career from a disregard for diversity to a highly intentional 
appreciation for it at all levels of technology company management.
    At this stage, Congress can support this mindset by taking whatever 
steps available to it for the further diversification of our STEM 
workforce--steps that will be supported by the tech industry. If we as 
a nation do not do so, we will undermine our industrial base, our 
socioeconomic fabric, and our foundation for future growth.

    Question 2. What role do historically black colleges and 
universities (HBCUs) and other minority-serving institutions play in 
helping to build a diverse workforce? What lessons can universities and 
other institutions draw from the success of HBCUs in supporting our 
STEM workforce?
    Answer. For many years, I was a part of the industry advisory board 
created by Jackson State University as it stood up its Computer 
Engineering department from scratch in the 2000s, and I watched the 
faculty and students rapidly grow professionally and academically. The 
obstacles and failures I watched them overcome, as well as the 
successes I saw along the way--and the lessons I drew from that 
experience--would fill many pages.
    The most salient lessons were the critical importance of accessible 
role models and high standards, and their impact on student experience 
and workforce readiness. Jackson State University, as the HBCU I know 
best, had to make many difficult decisions as it created the culture of 
its new School of Engineering. HBCUs have an opportunity to promote 
world-class excellence in STEM that can have a high-profile impact 
across the technology ecosystem. For many engineering tasks, which 
impact public safety and well-being in myriad ways, ``good enough'' is 
not good enough--standards mean something. It seems to be an 
unfortunate truth that even almost 100 years later, the mentality of 
the Tuskegee Airmen--that they push themselves to be the best fighter 
pilots in the air because of their skin color--is still a societal 
dynamic that students of color must deal with. I saw my JSU colleagues 
use this challenge as an opportunity to push for a culture of the 
highest standards for their students, which raises the bar for STEM 
students everywhere no matter their socioeconomic background. I welcome 
further discussion that might help Senator Warnock with any efforts on 
this vital topic.

    Rural Institutions: Georgia is a proud agricultural state, and I am 
particularly excited for how advanced technologies will help improve 
precision agriculture and otherwise support America's farmers. I am 
concerned, however, by the underrepresentation of rural students and 
rural colleges and universities among America's leading research 
institutions and the effect this will have in fields such as precision 
agriculture.

    Question 3. What barriers do rural students face in entering the 
workforce in advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and 
quantum computing? How can Congress help address these barriers?
    Answer. Rural students are generally unlikely to have direct 
exposure to cutting-edge technologies in general, and even less likely 
to learn the methods by which they are developed. This exposure comes 
from visits to high-tech companies, presentations by role models in 
their communities, and projects that give them hands-on experience with 
technology-related tools and concepts. I agree wholeheartedly with 
Senator Warnock that these barriers have the potential to negatively 
impact technology topics of interest to rural states, such as precision 
agriculture, because the combination of related expertise areas by 
individuals, academic teams, and companies that are needed to create 
advanced new products and services in rural areas will be uncommon.
    Congress could help address these barriers by supporting activities 
that provide educational opportunities to students and to their parents 
regarding the career potential of these advanced technologies. Congress 
should also ensure that some of the societal and economic forces that 
lead to centralization of innovation--personnel and equipment and 
infrastructure--are not explicitly or implicitly reinforced by its 
policies. The component of the CHIPS Act that emphasizes the 
participation of EPSCoR states in the regional technology hubs is an 
excellent example of what Congress can do to provide long-term 
investment in rural-oriented development of advanced technologies.

    Question 4. What barriers do rural colleges and universities and 
their faculties face in accessing and supporting research related 
advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence and quantum 
computing? How can Congress help address these barriers?
    Answer. The nature of high-growth, high-potential technologies is 
that there is often a ``first mover advantage'' in many ways--as 
interest grows in a topic, those who have established themselves as the 
experts can attract outsized attention and new resources as others join 
in and try to get up to speed quickly. That leads to a self-reinforcing 
cycle in which the biggest keep getting bigger. If something new 
happens to get its start in a rural area, the draw of moving the effort 
to the additional resources of an urban area will be significant. 
Congress can help with this by recognizing this dynamic (often referred 
to as ``power law'' economics) and enacting policies to counter it when 
possible. For example, qualified regions or entities could receive 
related infrastructure investments (specialized lab facilities, 
targeted workforce development programs, etc) that would serve as 
anchors to keep innovation tied to specific locations. Support for 
workforce development in rural communities focused on developing and 
keeping opportunities for advanced technology-related employment is 
also something Congress should continue to make a priority.

    Global Collaboration and Competition: I have long believed that 
America must invest in innovation and advanced technologies to maintain 
our global standing. I am deeply alarmed that our global competitors, 
such as the Chinese Communist Party, have heavily invested in 
technology research and used it to oppress its own people and bolster 
autocratic regimes throughout the world. To keep America on the leading 
edge, Congress must strike the appropriate level of controls on 
innovation and intellectual property to protect our national and 
economic security without overly hindering scientific innovation and 
international collaboration.

    Question 5. What are the key concerns that Congress should keep in 
mind as we work to achieve this balance? Please share any examples of 
Federal programs that you believe do not strike the right balance.
    Answer. Senator Warnock is right to be concerned about this 
troubling dynamic within our international competitive environment. In 
some cases, various Federal programs and entities might have taken 
longer than they should have to recognize this threat, but I do not 
currently see any who are acting as if they are unaware of their 
responsibility to protect American interests.
    The area of greatest concern to Congress should be the sensitive 
issue of immigration, particularly how we attract, welcome, and keep 
the most innovative and energetic individuals, companies, and 
communities from around the globe as American citizens--to integrate 
them instead of compete with them. Many of our most successful 
technology companies (e.g., Google) were created by immigrants. Rural 
areas have very low cost of living and excellent telecommunications 
connectivity. Congress would be wise to implement immigration policies 
to get global entrepreneurs to move to rural areas, where their impact 
will be greater and the social pressures to promote pro-American values 
and behaviors will be greater as well.

                                  [all]