Analysis frame
Primary-source evidence
Read the order's immediate terminology rule, definition clause and 60-day proposal separately so a renaming is not mistaken for a measured capability or enacted statute.
- Citizens and agencies trying to understand federal AI policy
- Researchers, auditors and contractors matching new documents to existing law and historical records
- Agencies have not yet shown how the terminology will be applied across all documents
- The future proposed statutory definition and any congressional action are unknown
- Official rebranding may alter public expectations about current model capabilities
- Document searches and cross-border comparison may become harder if terms diverge without clear mapping
The order's immediate effect
Agencies are directed to use the new terms in correspondence, public communications, websites and non-statutory documents where law permits. Existing historical records need not be altered.
Section 3 initially ties 'SI' to the existing legal definition of AI. The order therefore cannot be read as a certification of model capability.
A definition is still to come
The presidential science adviser must propose statutory language within 60 days. Any actual legislative change would require a separate process.
In the meantime, agencies should pair the new label with system-specific evaluations and a clear mapping to existing AI rules, so language does not outrun evidence.
Go to the source
Read the evidence behind this analysis. External links open in a new tab.
White House — Executive Order 14434


