In a move that reflects growing concerns about artificial intelligence’s potential impacts, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is teaming up with The MITRE Corporation to establish two new research centers with a combined funding of $20 million. These centers aim to forge collaborations across government, industry, and academia, targeting emerging cybersecurity threats driven by AI technologies. As cyber risks targeting critical infrastructure become more sophisticated, the centers’ missions reflect a broader push for applied science in digital defense. The initiative is expected to promote the responsible integration of AI into essential U.S. services while considering real-world constraints in rapidly changing threat environments.
Claims around AI impacting both manufacturing and critical infrastructure are not new, but past initiatives have typically centered on either safety or standards development. Federal investments previously focused on establishing research frameworks or on promoting U.S. competition in the field, especially in relation to China. The recent creation of NIST’s AI Economic Security Center and upcoming investments in resilient manufacturing institutes mark a shift toward operational, risk-driven research and the adoption of agentic AI solutions. The current NIST-MITRE effort intensifies the focus on protecting the digital backbone of essential sectors such as water, electricity, and internet services from evolving cyber threats.
What Will the New AI Centers Focus On?
One of the upcoming centers will advance research in AI-driven manufacturing, while the other—named the AI Economic Security Center—will directly address how to safeguard critical U.S. infrastructure, like utilities and communications, from AI-enabled cyberthreats. Both centers aim to create robust evaluation methods and promote the safe deployment of advanced technologies, including agentic artificial intelligence tools. According to NIST spokesperson Jennifer Huergo,
“The centers will develop the technology evaluations and advancements that are necessary to effectively protect U.S. dominance in AI innovation, address threats from adversaries’ use of AI, and reduce risks from reliance on insecure AI.”
Their scope extends to supporting discovery and commercialization initiatives that can strengthen U.S. economic security.
How Are Stakeholders and Industry Being Involved?
Engagement with industry experts and stakeholders from sectors such as power and water is being highlighted as a priority for the success of these centers. Representatives stress that technological advancements need translation into practical solutions for those managing real operations. Illumio CTO Gary Barlet remarked on the importance of considering perspectives from essential service providers, noting that without their involvement, the impact of research could be limited. Barlet further commented,
“Too often, these centers are built by technologists for technologists, while the people who actually run our power grids, water systems, and other critical infrastructure are left out of the conversation.”
This underlines the call for actionable, stakeholder-focused outcomes.
How Could the Centers Affect U.S. Cybersecurity and Competition?
By integrating expertise from the AI, cybersecurity, and infrastructure domains, NIST and MITRE’s centers intend to improve detection and mitigation of advanced cyber threats, especially those escalated by fast-evolving AI systems. Federal support is being credited with encouraging more expansive applied research projects, overcoming previous years’ limitations tied to resources and coordination. With substantial funding, the hope is to decrease fragmentation, enabling a broader impact across industries that sustain national infrastructure. This can provide a model for collaboration between public and private sectors, ultimately shaping a more secure and resilient technological landscape for the country.
The renewed emphasis on actionable AI and cybersecurity research follows national policy shifts that prioritize both economic competition and resilience over general AI safety concerns alone. While earlier endeavors mainly emphasized establishing standards or responding to concrete threats, the current approach seeks to bridge gap between research and practical applications in everyday operations of crucial systems. The anticipated AI for Resilient Manufacturing Institute will further add to a portfolio that aims at fortifying America’s manufacturing base with new AI tools, reflecting policymakers’ evolving priorities in technology investment and management of supply chain vulnerabilities. However, the success of such efforts will hinge on genuine collaboration with frontline operators and responsiveness to rapidly shifting cyber threat landscapes. By anchoring AI research initiatives in real-world needs and drawing on multi-sector experience, the United States could set an example for how major economies grapple with the dual-use nature of rapidly advancing digital technologies.
