Workstream 1 RFC: Establishing Common Terminology

[matt-cohere]

CoSAI Workstream 1 RFC: Establishing Common Terminology

Authors:

• Matt Maloney
• Jay White
• Andre Elizondo

Summary:

This Request for Comments (RFC) aims to establish a standardized vocabulary and definitions within Workstream 1. By defining a common set of terms, we ensure consistent understanding and communication among all participants, fostering a collaborative environment. The proposed terminology will serve as a foundation, addressing ambiguities and promoting efficient collaboration. For example, the term "model" can have varying interpretations, and we aim to clarify such nuances.

Priority:

P0 - Defining common terms is crucial for the workstream's progress, as it will be repeatedly used and referenced.

Level of Effort:

• Term Selection: Low - Identifying relevant terms should be straightforward.
• Definition Agreement: Moderate - Reaching a consensus on precise definitions may require more discussion and refinement.

Drawbacks:

• Initial Process: The process of defining terminology may be perceived as tedious, especially during the initial stages.
• Adoption Time: It might take some time for all participants to fully adopt and integrate the new terminology.

Alternatives:

• Progressive Disclosure: Instead of an immediate comprehensive list, we could introduce definitions gradually in subsequent releases or papers.

[yilmi]

The scope of this workstream should be clarified by including the definition of "Software Supply Chain for AI Systems" as part of this RFC. Also, we should as much as possible reuse terminology that is accepted in the industry.

[ollol88]

We would appreciate your thoughts on the list of terms in section 3 (moving target) in https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zhpazMhgJ4ciR3E0gTvwf9o2zFd-Warwm96PouJErl0/edit?usp=sharing . Do you think these terms would be within the scope of this RFC?