Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?


Artificial Intelligence

Insider Q&A: Pentagon AI Chief on Network-Centric Warfare, Generative AI Challenges

Interview with Craig Martell, Chief Digital and AI Officer (CDAO) for the U.S. Department of Defense, about AI use in the military.

AI used in military

The Pentagon’s chief digital and artificial intelligence offer, Craig Martell, is alarmed by the potential for generative artificial intelligence systems like ChatGPT to deceive and sow disinformation. His talk on the technology at the DefCon hacker convention in August was a huge hit. But he’s anything but sour on reliable AI.

Not a soldier but a data scientist, Martell headed machine-learning at companies including LinkedIn, Dropbox and Lyft before taking the job last year.

Marshalling the U.S. military’s data and determining what AI is trustworthy enough to take into battle is a big challenge in an increasingly unstable world where multiple countries are racing to develop lethal autonomous weapons.

The interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Q: What is your main mission?

A: Our job is to scale decision advantage from the boardroom to the battlefield. I don’t see it as our job to tackle a few particular missions but rather to develop the tools, processes, infrastructure and policies that allow the department as a whole to scale.

Q: So the goal is global information dominance? What do you need to succeed?

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

A: We are finally getting at network-centric warfare — how to get the right data to the right place at the right time. There is a hierarchy of needs: quality data at the bottom, analytics and metrics in the middle, AI at the top. For this to work, most important is high-quality data.

Craig Martell, Chief Digital and AI Officer (CDAO) for the U.S. Department of Defense, discusses AI in the military.
Craig Martell, Chief Digital and AI Officer (CDAO) for the U.S. Department of Defense

Q: How should we think about AI use in military applications?

A: All AI is, really, is counting the past to predict the future. I don’t actually think the modern wave of AI is any different.

Q: Pentagon planners say the China threat makes AI development urgent. Is China winning the AI arms race?

A: I find that metaphor somewhat flawed. When we had a nuclear arms race it was with a monolithic technology. AI is not that. Nor is it a Pandora’s box. It’s a set of technologies we apply on a case-by-base basis, verifying empirically whether it’s effective or not.

Q: The U.S. military is using AI tech to assist Ukraine. How are you helping?

A: Our team is not involved with Ukraine other than to help build a database for how allies provide assistance. It’s called Skyblue. We’re just helping make sure that stays organized.

Q: There is much discussion about autonomous lethal weaponry – like attack drones. The consensus is humans will ultimately be reduced to a supervisory role — being able to abort missions but mostly not interfering. Sound right?

A: In the military we train with a technology until we develop a justified confidence. We understand the limits of a system, know when it works and when it might not. How does this map to autonomous systems? Take my car. I trust the adaptive cruise control on it. The technology that is supposed to keep it from changing lanes, on the other hand, is terrible. So I don’t have justified confidence in that system and don’t use it. Extrapolate that to the military.

Q: The Air Force’s “loyal wingman” program in development would have drones fly in tandem with fighter jets flown by humans. Is the computer vision good enough to distinguish friend from foe?

A: Computer vision has made amazing strides in the past 10 years. Whether it’s useful in a particular situation is an empirical question. We need to determine the precision we are willing to accept for the use case and build against that criteria – and test. So we can’t generalize. I would really like us to stop talking about the technology as a monolith and talk instead about the capabilities we want.

Q: You are currently studying generative AI and large-language models. When might it be used in the Department of Defense?

A: The commercial large-language models are definitely not constrained to tell the truth, so I am skeptical. That said, through Task Force Lima (launched in August) we are studying more than 160 use cases. We want to decide what is low risk and safe. I’m not setting official policy here, but let’s hypothesize. Low-risk could be something like generating first drafts in writing or computer code. In such cases, humans are going to edit, or in the case of software, compile. It could also potentially work for information retrieval — where facts can be validated to ensure they are correct.

Cyber AI & Automation Summit
SecurityWeek’s Cyber AI & Automation Summit pushes the boundaries of security discussions by exploring the implications and applications of predictive AI, machine learning, and automation in cybersecurity programs. (Register – Free)

Q: A big challenge with AI is hiring and retaining the talent needed to test and evaluate systems and label data. AI data scientists earn a lot more than what the Pentagon has traditionally paid. How big a problem is this?

A: That’s a huge can of worms. We have just created a digital talent management office and are thinking hard about how to fill a whole new set of job roles. For example, do we really need to be hiring people who are looking to stay at the Department of Defense for 20-30 years? Probably not. But what if we can get them for three or four? What if we paid for their college and they pay us back with three or four years and then go off with that experience and get hired by Silicon Valley? We’re thinking creatively like this. Could we, for example, be part of a diversity pipeline? Recruit at HBCUs (historically Black colleges and universities)?

Dr Martell’s keynote at a NATO summit

Related: Pentagon Adopts New Ethical Principles for Using AI in War

Written By

Daily Briefing Newsletter

Subscribe to the SecurityWeek Email Briefing to stay informed on the latest threats, trends, and technology, along with insightful columns from industry experts.

Join us as we delve into the transformative potential of AI, predictive ChatGPT-like tools and automation to detect and defend against cyberattacks.


As cybersecurity breaches and incidents escalate, the cyber insurance ecosystem is undergoing rapid and transformational change.


Expert Insights

Related Content


WASHINGTON - Cyberattacks are the most serious threat facing the United States, even more so than terrorism, according to American defense experts. Almost half...

Artificial Intelligence

The CRYSTALS-Kyber public-key encryption and key encapsulation mechanism recommended by NIST for post-quantum cryptography has been broken using AI combined with side channel attacks.

Artificial Intelligence

The release of OpenAI’s ChatGPT in late 2022 has demonstrated the potential of AI for both good and bad.


Patch Tuesday: Microsoft calls attention to a series of zero-day remote code execution attacks hitting its Office productivity suite.

Artificial Intelligence

ChatGPT is increasingly integrated into cybersecurity products and services as the industry is testing its capabilities and limitations.

Artificial Intelligence

The degree of danger that may be introduced when adversaries start to use AI as an effective weapon of attack rather than a tool...


Russian espionage group Nomadic Octopus infiltrated a Tajikistani telecoms provider to spy on 18 entities, including government officials and public service infrastructures.


Several hacker groups have joined in on the Israel-Hamas war that started over the weekend after the militant group launched a major attack.