‘Shut it down and start again’: staff disquiet as Alan Turing Institute faces identity crisis | Artificial intelligence (AI)

As the British government announced the creation of the Alan Turing Institute In 2014 it promised the renowned computer scientist and artificial intelligence pioneer a “suitable monument”.

More than a decade before the British AI institute is in turmoil because the staff warn that it may be at risk of collapse, and the ministers are calling for a shift in focus on defense and security work.

“The ATI brand is well recognized internationally,” says Dame Wendy Hall, professor of computer science at the University of Southampton and Co-Chairman of an AI check from 2017. “If it stops being the National Institute for AI and Data Science, the risk of weakening our international leadership in AI is to weaken.”

Turing's legacy as a mathematical genius, which contributed to cracking the puzzle code, outlined Key concepts from AI And invented the test of the same name In order to recognize whether a computer can show human intelligence, it has been rebuilt and burned in recent years.

In 2013 he received one posthumously royal pardon 59 years after his death, was convicted of gross indecency in 1952 after admitting a sexual relationship with a man. A year later he was immortalized Oscar-rejected film The Imitation Game And In 2021 he became the face of the 50 pound grade.

However, a cornerstone of this heritage is in trouble. This month a group of employees Submitted a whistleblower complaint with the charitywhich plays a regulatory role in ATI because the nominally independent organization is a registered charity organization – although largely financed by the British government.

The complaint brought eight reason to worry, including the possibility that 100 million GBP could be withdrawn from government financial funds, which could “lead to the collapse of the institute”.

“These concerns are so important that many employees now believe that the non -profit status and credibility of the institute are at risk,” says the complaint, which also caused concerns about internal government and culture and monitoring expenditure.

It is the latest in a number of employees in management. More than 180 employees in March last year wrote a letter to leadership “Seriously concerned the organization's approach to diversity after making four men in senior roles. In December More than 90 employees warned in another letter This credibility of ATI was in the middle of a restructuring in the middle of a “serious danger” that threatened jobs – and research projects.

ATI recently informed around 50 employees – or about 10% of its workforce – that they are exposed to the risk of redundancy and that projects in connection with online security, combating the real estate crisis and the reduction of health reliance are discontinued.

This is part of an overhaul called Turing 2.0, in which the institute will concentrate on three key areas: health, environment as well as defense and security.

A recent letter from the British technology secretary industry, Peter Kylemade it clear that the overhaul does not go far enough. Kyle wrote at the chair of ATI last month and asked the institute for defense and security and added that Ati could be checked next year.

“In the future, defense and national security projects should form a core of ATI activities, and relationships with security, defense and secret services in Great Britain should be strengthened accordingly,” wrote Kyle.

He also stated that management changes could be necessary.

“In order to recognize this vision, it is absolutely necessary that the leadership of the ATI reflects the reformed focus of the institute,” he wrote. “The importance of a management team that has a relevant background and sector knowledge to lead this transition should be carefully taken into account.”

Against this background-a long-term dissatisfaction of the employees with the leadership, a strategic and financial overhaul and then a bomb from the government letters submitted the complaint of the Whistleblower.

Ati is headed by the managing director Jean Innes, who had leading roles in the public service and in the Tech sector and is led by Doug Gurr, the former head of the British operations of Amazon and the chair of Amazon. Interest chairman of the British competitive guardian.

Last month, Gurr replied to Kyle with a letter in which it promised to “increase” for defense and national security and to increase the confidence of the United Kingdom in the AI or the “sovereign skills”.

“We will rise at a time of national needs,” wrote Gurr.

However, Gurr added that ATI “continues to promote highly effective work in the environment and healthcare system”, where it fits the “missions of the government and the interests of our philanthropic and private donors”.

At a recent meeting between employees and the ATI leadership, which were held from a distance, Gurr raised with great questions about the new direction, the Kyle and the restructuring of the institute. An attendant said the atmosphere was difficult and described the mood among the more than 100 employees during the meeting as “contemptuous”.

In an internal note to the employees this week, Innes and Gurr confirmed a new working group of government officials and ATI employees to discuss the new direction. It also confirmed that people would leave contracts through layoffs and non-new buildings.

The goals of ATI include “promoting first -class research and applying to national and global challenges” as well as promoting an “informed public conversation” about AI. The five universities in Great Britain were Cambridge, Oxford, Edinburgh, Ucl and Warwick, with the research work including the cooperation with the MET Office Improvement of the weather forecastcreate Heart “digital twins” Examine heart diseases and Improvement of air traffic control control.

A source that worked in the previous conservative government said that Labor's concerns about the institute were “anything but new”, and for some time there have been in political circles of the institute's performance, with several stakeholders from the university blurred their focus.

In this context, according to the source, it makes sense to double what the institute does well – defense and security – or “simply close and start from the front”.

Prof. Jon Crowcroft, the Marconi professor for communication systems at the computer laboratory of the University of Cambridge and Innes consultant, says that the institute's employees are unsettled.

“I think the crisis in terms of people is real. Many people are still there because they believe that it is a good, open institution that does valuable public work. But they also wonder where their work will be,” he says.

He adds: “I have not seen a plan A to make all employees happy, which would mean to keep some non-defense and security projects. The reason why the employees have published these letters is that they have not seen it.”

Regarding Ati's basis in the British Library in London, he also says: “I also saw a plan B for what happens when too many people go because so many projects have disappeared, which means that core financing is not sustainable and the size of the building in which you are in is not justified.”

According to a current employee who says that they have belonged to a “diverse” series of concerns among colleagues, there are “mixed views” for impending shift in defense and security.

“We understand the problem of national importance. Very few of us say that work should not happen. But we believe that a unique focus would be too tight. Turing strength arises from the application of AI to a wide range of social challenges, from health to the environment, with responsible innovation in the heart.”

The employee adds: “These areas are still important, and with the right leadership we could fulfill the vision and the purpose that brought us here at all.”

The employee adds that Gurr's letter has undertaken to double itself in defense and security, while she is still working on health and the environment, ATI leaves the government in a “precarious patient situation”.

“The leadership hopes that the government's attention will change,” they said. Hall says that the institute has no choice but to change.

“There is clearly not much money and the institute has to do what the government demands. If this is not the case, the government will probably close.”

She adds: “The institute initially ceased to be what it was initially, a National Institute for Data Science and AI. The government asked to concentrate on defense and security. Whether Britain needs such an institute to decide.” Personally, I would like to see the reason. “

Crowcroft, who defends the quality of the work of the institute, says that Great Britain has always been strong in AI and is “probably even stronger” and indicates several generations of AI expertise, which were produced by universities such as Cambridge, Oxford, Imperial College and Edinburgh, as in London's London London Microsoos, which is accommodated in Great Britain,, And the business with the structure of AI.

A spokesman for ATI said that the institute had passed a “essential” change in order to continue to save in its unique role as the British National Institute for Data Science and Ai.

“As we develop, we focus on achieving real effects on the greatest challenges of society, including the reaction to the national necessity to double our work in defense, national security and sovereign skills.”

A government spokesman said that the technology secretary wants ATI to show added value for money for the taxpayer, which can be achieved by “granting the institute a key role in securing our national security and positioning the British public there.

Turing's legacy will live on. But with regard to the institute that bears its name, its durability is doubtful.