Talk:Mitre Corporation

Content
This article could be expanded, does anybody have any ideas? -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * We should add information about the locations -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe something about the size of the organization (6500 people) and selected high-profile projects (from public web site)? Robomanx 02:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

There should be some material on the controversey surrounding MITRE and its use of sole source contracts. The professional services organization has lodged protests with Congress, DoD, and GAO regarding MITRE. (GAO reports and Congressional resarch reports) Also, other independent not-for-profit research organizations have filed formal complaints with the Air Force regarding non-competitive practices. (FOIA request from Air Force Electronic Systems Center)170.94.197.54 (talk) 00:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

There should be some mention of the hoax that MITRE orchestrated the 9/11 attackes.--Pndfam05 (talk) 23:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

MITRE itself published an official history during the time I worked there, about 1980, which provides many details, although it glosses over any hint of controversy and avoids any mention of its classified work. Ronenfield (talk) 12:42, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be Mitre?
Shouldn't this article be titled "Mitre"? According to MOS:TM, trademarks always use normal capitalization. Unless anyone can explain why it shouldn't be "Mitre" I'm going to change it in a week. -- RationalIce (talk) 02:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Since the SourceWatch article indicates that the name Mitre is taken from the word "mitre" and no one has offered any reason to keep the all-caps, I've moved the article to Mitre Corporation. -- RationalIce (talk) 04:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The company MITRE is always referred to by all caps. See http://www.mitre.org for examples of how the company refers to itself. I'm changing it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deccles (talk • contribs) 14:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Which is nice, but has nothing to do with how it should appear in the Wikipedia. Lego always refers to themself in all-caps too, but Wikipedia uses just Lego regardless. So please explain why it should be all-caps in the Wikipedia. The only reason I can come up with based on MOS:TM would be if each letter were spoken individually (em-eye-tea-are-ee) - which, according to the SourceWatch article, it isn't, it's taken straight from the word "miter" using a British spelling for whatever reason. -- RationalIce (talk) 01:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Regardless, I disagree with you. The SourceWatch article is incorrect, the name MITRE is not taken straight from the word "miter". There are a number of mistaken stories regarding the origin of the name. The intent of MITRE's name is to be in the form of an acronym (we've just never admitted what the acronym stands for). See companies like SAIC, it's not written "Saic" in the Wikipedia page. Doesn't Saic look wrong? It's the same with MITRE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deccles (talk • contribs) 04:33, 27 August 2008 (UTC) Anyway, I double checked and you selectively quoted the SourceWatch article. It says: "The name MITRE was chosen by one of the original incorporators for its neutrality and positive feel. Some have suggested the choice was based on one meaning of mitre, 'the fitting together of surfaces.' Others have suggested that the first three letters also helped to honor MIT and the original MITRE staff. Perhaps both factors came into play.

So according to SourceWatch it could be from either the word, or from the MIT acronym, it's all speculation. Given that no one can prove which is right, I think we should err on the side of correctness, as opposed to filling the MITRE page with the wrong capitalization and misleading everyone who visits the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deccles (talk • contribs) 04:44, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to link to this one more time. Please actually read it this time: Manual of Style (trademarks). Even if Mitre is an acronym, it should still be Mitre. The only exception are names where each letter is pronounced, like IBM. Given that Mitre is pronounced as "miter" (unless you have a source that says it isn't) it should still be Mitre. Just as with Lego, a much larger and more well-known company, no one cares what they say the capitalization should be. Wikipedia uses standard English rules, with the exceptions listed in the manual of style. -- RationalIce (talk) 02:42, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I did read it, I'm just having trouble understanding nonsense. You win, you're right, Wikipedia should have it wrong because of a rule that frankly makes no sense. Don't blame me if people come away from this site badmouthing Wikipedia for having things wrong, as they do for so many other things. Wikipedia now has the honor of being the only place on the internet that has MITRE in the wrong caps.

Just out of curiosity, should RAND be Rand? Robomanx (talk) 06:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

if you want the unofficial acronym its: Many Individuals Trying to Retire Early. But seriously, the MITRE Corporation is only referred to as "MITRE" never Mitre. It creates a confusion with the Mitre corporation which is a sporting goods company if spelled lowercase. Even though the guidelines says you should always only capitalize the first letter it also says: except where common sense and the occasional exception will improve an article.  Barbscorgi (talk) 03:13, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Correct spelling of MITRE not Mitre. Why do you spell WIKIPEDIA in your opening page and not Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.83.31.1 (talk) 00:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

At least when I search MITRE using all caps, it redirects to the correct page. I likewise agree that the main article should be named MITRE, but don't want to take the flame bait on this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.119.177.200 (talk) 02:48, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I am changing it to MITRE. If you want to change it back explain why RAND should be in all caps and not MITRE or be consistent and change RAND to Rand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.65.71.50 (talk) 05:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I have gone through the article and replaced Mitre with MITRE. This wasn't to be belligerent but merely an attempt to make the article look more internally consistent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.65.71.50 (talk) 09:05, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

A cursory look through Wikipedia indicates that this style guide entry isn't really enforced. Counterexamples include CENTCOM, NATO, RAND, PepsiCo, ALPO, and FedEx. To me, that implies that "MITRE" should be ok. Robomanx (talk) 17:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

This is MIT research establishment IIRC... Who the heck wants it to be a Mitre when this is outright wrong? 212.188.109.218 (talk) 21:47, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Sheesh, this is stupid. Yes, Rand should be in title-caps, but I have a limited amount of time to edit the Wikipedia and don't really feel like going to try and correct every single WP:MOS error I see, especially when fixing them would require going through hundreds of pages. RationalIce (talk) 03:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Rumors
There is currently a section that claims that MITRE is named in some rumors related to 9/11. First, the source is unreliable, so it is totally inappropriate to cite it. It might be OK if the link were to an analysis of 9/11 rumors, but this is not the case. Second, given the size of this article, even if MITRE were the number one focal point of 9/11 conspiracy theories (which, as far as I can tell, it is not), this fact would not warrant inclusion on this page (see Wikipedia's undue weight policy). Mitre's relation to 9/11 conspiracy theories is at best trivia and at worst slander. 66.117.135.137 (talk) 05:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I can confirm that MITRE was indeed partially behind 9/11. Unless anyone can prove me wrong, I am going to update the article accordingly in a week. 148.129.71.52 (talk) 18:45, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

How can anyone "prove" whether 148.129.71.52 is right or wrong without the basis for his assertion? Robomanx (talk) 19:40, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

The article will be updated to reflect MITRE's 9/11 involvement in six days. 148.129.71.52 (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Why do most conspiracy theorists hide in anonymity? Robomanx (talk) 20:22, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I support this edit. MITRE was indeed involved in 9/11. I look forward to five days from now when this article is completed. 72.83.110.121 (talk) 03:09, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Four days now. 148.129.71.52, can you give us a preview of what information you will place in this article about MITRE's involvement in 9/11? 72.83.110.121 (talk) 02:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I will update the article in three days. 72.83.110.121, I will provide more information tomorrow, as well as a brief preview the day after. 148.129.71.52 (talk) 15:41, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

In 48 hours (2 days) I will update this article. At noon on April 1st, EST the article will be updated with the conspiracy information. Check back tomorrow for a brief preview of what I will be placing in the article. 148.129.71.52 (talk) 15:59, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

The following is an excerpt from my update for the article:

"MITRE's Beford headquarters' close proximity to Boston's Logan Airport has also fueled speculation about MITRE's involvement in the September 11th attacks. Indira Singh, an IT consultant who previously worked on a Defense Advanced Research Project, and who was employed by J.P. Morgan on September 11th, 2001, in risk management, pointed to MITRE's role at the FAA during the 9/11 Citizens' Commission hearings in New York City."

The article will be updated tomorrow at 12:00 pm EST. 148.129.71.52 (talk) 17:23, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

The article has been updated. 148.129.71.52 (talk) 16:00, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

MITRE stands for MIT Research and Engineering. RAND stands for Research And Development. Both should be all caps. 76.76.220.34 (talk) 23:08, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism
This article has come under recent vandalism - entire sections of the article have been deleted. In particular, the section detailing MITRE's possible involvement in 9/11 is continuously removed, possibly by a user with a conflicting interest in MITRE. The information in that section is merely speculative but they are rumors that must be made known. Any user who disagrees likely has some level of personal interest in MITRE or is simply anti-American. 148.129.129.154 (talk) 18:01, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I will endeavour to contact an authority figure about the problems this article has had in recent months. I will refrain from editing the article for now, but I guarantee that this article will be cleaned up and the relevant information made available. Bblcreator8790 (talk) 02:36, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Just so certain editors of the article don't get confused, the above two users are the same person, engaging in the worst form of WP:SOCK -- acting as if their view has more support than it does. The source they keep adding is unreliable: it's published in a public forum or on the authority of a lone conspiracy theorist at best.  Further, the Bollyn source doesn't back up the text: he doesn't accuse MITRE of anything, just notes that MITRE might have been in a position to do these things.  Even if this source did pass the bare minimum standards, the section is inappropriate if this is the only source - it's one thing to cover a legitimate controversy, it's another to give a platform to every lone voice with a point of view.  If this is a legitimate controversy, it needs MUCH more sourcing than this.  Mango juice talk 11:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Disregarding any conspiracy theories, if reliable sources indicate that MITRE was specifically involved in defense operations on 9/11, is it not worth noting? I can think of no reason why it wouldn't be. Certainly this would be more notable than an award the corporation received. 74.78.179.2 (talk) 14:49, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Origin
Where does the name "MITRE" comes from ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.204.90.1 (talk) 06:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)


 * MIT Research and Engineering.

128.29.43.2 (talk) 15:49, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Proposed changes to "Corporate governance" section
Hello, my name is Jeremy and I work at MITRE. I'm here to propose updates and share sources relevant to the company's Wikipedia article, and I understand that I mustn't make edits to the page myself because of my conflict of interest. To start, I'd like to address the "Corporate governance" section, which has subsections about CEOs and trustees. Currently the section has only 3 citations, 2 of which are published by MITRE. I propose replacing the outdated and mostly unsourced lists of CEOs and trustees with the following sourced overview of the company's presidents/CEOs, other C-suite executives, and current notable trustees based on quality sources:

I propose replacing the "Chief executive officers" and "Board of Trustees" subsections with a single "Leadership" subsection. You can see how this section fits within my draft as a whole at User:JS at MITRE/Draft. Can someone please review and update the section on my behalf, assuming the proposed changes are appropriate? Happy to address questions and concerns. Thank you! JS at MITRE (talk) 17:26, 20 May 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zoozaz1 talk  18:19, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Proposed changes to "Organization" section
Thank you for reviewing the above request and updating the article on my behalf!

For my next request, I'd like to focus on the "Organization" section, which has an outdated table with content mostly supported by MITRE-published sources. Some of the information is inaccurate as there have been changes to the organization's structure, and some of the content is unsourced.

I propose removing this section and replacing with this updated and improved "Organizational structure" subsection, which provides readers with an overview of MITRE's overall structure (including MITRE Labs and Engenuity) as well as subsections about federally funded research and development centers (FFRDCs) and the Center for Data-Driven Policy and former Center for Technology & National Security. In the draft article, I've placed this content under the "Governance and structure" section, which is a slight change to how the article is currently structured. You'll see overlap of the topics covered:


 * National Security Engineering Center (formerly C3I Federally Funded Research and Development Center); Department of Defense
 * Center for Advanced Aviation System Development; FAA
 * Center for Enterprise Modernization; IRS, Department of Veterans Affairs
 * Homeland Security Systems Engineering and Development Institute; DHS
 * CMS Alliance to Modernize Healthcare; Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
 * National Cybersecurity FFRDC; NIST

My goal here is simply to correct and update the content using reputable sources not published by MITRE, and of course I've converted the table into prose. I'm hoping Zoozaz1 or another editor can review the proposed text and update the article. Again, happy to address questions and concerns.

Thanks! JS at MITRE (talk) 15:03, 25 May 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zoozaz1 talk  19:47, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Proposed changes to "History" section
Thanks again for reviewing the above request and updating the article on my behalf. I really appreciate your timely responses!

For my next request, I'd like to focus on the "History" section, which has a few inaccuracies, some unsourced paragraphs, and content sourced by MITRE publications. Additionally, some of the information is about specific projects, which I've separated out as a new section in my proposed draft.

I propose removing this section and replacing with this updated and improved "History" section, which provides readers with an overview of MITRE's history as a whole, based on secondary sourcing. Again, you can see how the proposed section is presented within the complete draft here.

One disclaimer: When I preview what the updated article looks like with the proposed section implemented, I see the following message for Source #3 in the References section: Cite error: The named reference MITRE_media_resources was invoked but never defined (see the help page). To fix this error, one can simply remove Source #3 from the introduction, after "stylized as The MITRE Corporation". I assume the MITRE website should not be used as a source here.

Additionally, since one of the sources in the "History" section is defined in the proposed "Overview" section, I suggest adding this as the top section as well. Below I've shared markup for the proposed "Overview" without the "Lake" reference defined, in order to avoid the message "Cite error: The named reference "Lake" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page)." This section is intended to give readers an 'at a glance' summary of the organization, including headquarters locations, fields of work, and the number of employees and patents as of 2020. Please see the following:

Given the couple disclaimers, I'd like to clarify, my request is to replace the "History" section and add the proposed "Overview" section. For the latter, I've shared specific markup above, which is the same as what's presented in my full draft but without the "Lake" source defined, avoiding duplication. Zoozaz1, do you have a moment to review the proposed text and update the article? As always, I'm happy to address questions and concerns.

Thanks again! JS at MITRE (talk) 16:53, 27 May 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅. I've integrated the proposed history section into the current history section and put the rest of the history section dealing with specific projects in a separate section that can be dealt with later. I haven't updated the lead (or overview) section much as the number of patents seems unnecessary to the general reader, the number of employees is already in the infobox, and the Washington Post quote seems overly promotional. You might want to look over WP:LEAD for how to write the overview. Zoozaz1 talk  19:59, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Proposed changes to "Projects" section
Thanks again for reviewing and updating the article on my behalf! I will review "WP:LEAD" for future reference.

For my next request, I'd like to focus on the "Projects" section, which is currently a subsection of "History" but has a couple issues: the first two paragraphs are unsourced and the last paragraph about the company's split in 1996 is now redundant to the last paragraph of the "History" section.

I've drafted an overview of MITRE's projects here, which has subsections for:
 * National security
 * Airspace, Global Positioning System (GPS), and aerospace
 * Cybersecurity and election integrity
 * Government innovation
 * Health care (which is further subdivided to have a subsection specific to the COVID-19 pandemic)

MITRE has worked on many projects over the decades and I'd like to think these summaries give readers a better understanding of what the company has done. I've tried to be brief and neutral, using only reputable sources. I propose replacing the current "Projects" subsection with the section I've proposed in the the full draft. I know this is a lot to review, and I'm willing to go section by section, but I wonder if Zoozaz1 might be willing to take another look and update the article appropriately? Also, I see an error message in the "References" section. Here's the Sugawara citation:

Thanks again! JS at MITRE (talk) 13:23, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


 * ✅ Zoozaz1 talk  13:46, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Proposed "Partnerships and coalitions" and "Locations" sections
Thanks again! I appreciate your willingness to review these requests to update the article so quickly. Next, I'd like to seek addition of the proposed "Partnerships and coalitions" and "Locations" sections. The former focuses on notable partnerships and collaborations and has a subsection dedicated to well-documented challenges. The latter is a summary of MITRE's facilities around the world, with emphasis on the headquarter campuses in Bedford and McLean. With more than 60 locations, I could see editors working to expand this section further over time, but this gets the ball rolling for now. Again, editors can view the full draft to see where I've placed this content within the larger picture. Zoozaz1, are you willing to review and update the article again?

Thank you! JS at MITRE (talk) 13:03, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ <b style="color: #fffb00">Zoozaz1</b> <b style="color: #fffb00">talk</b>  17:36, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Proposed "Recognition" section
Thanks again for your help! Next, I'd like to propose replacing the "Awards, honors, and accomplishments" section, which is written in bullet point form in reverse chronological order, with the "Recognition" section I've proposed in my full draft. The draft version is written in prose form and presents information in chronological order. The first two paragraphs very closely resemble the current section, and the third paragraph provides a few updates since the current section does not mention anything post-2015. Zoozaz1, are you willing to review and update the article again?

Thank you! JS at MITRE (talk) 13:23, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ <b style="color: #fffb00">Zoozaz1</b> <b style="color: #fffb00">talk</b>  20:24, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Proposed introduction
Thanks once again! I appreciate your continued help.

Zoozaz1, in a previous request you declined to implement the proposed "Overview" section and shared a link to WP:LEAD. I respect your assessment and decision not to include the Washington Post quote or the number of patents, but I'd like to make two points for your reconsideration.
 * In the introduction, could "American" be changed to "United States-based" in the opening sentence, since the organization operates outside the U.S. as well?
 * Additionally, if I'm understanding Manual_of_Style/Infoboxes correctly, the infobox should summarize claims made within the article body. If that's the case, shouldn't the article body mention the total number of employees outside the infobox?

In my full draft, I have a less detailed introduction with an "Overview". Since you prefer to leave out the overview section, perhaps the sourced claim "The organization has more than 8,400 employees, as of 2020" could be moved into the introduction and "American" could be changed to "United States-based"? I think the introduction would benefit from mentioning the year of establishment and number of employees, but I will let you and other editors decide.

Thank you! JS at MITRE (talk) 19:21, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Proposed introduction
Thanks once again! I appreciate your continued help.

Zoozaz1, in a previous request you declined to implement the proposed "Overview" section and shared a link to WP:LEAD. I respect your assessment and decision not to include the Washington Post quote or the number of patents, but I'd like to make two points for your reconsideration.
 * In the introduction, could "American" be changed to "United States-based" in the opening sentence, since the organization operates outside the U.S. as well?
 * Additionally, if I'm understanding Manual_of_Style/Infoboxes correctly, the infobox should summarize claims made within the article body. If that's the case, shouldn't the article body mention the total number of employees outside the infobox?

In my full draft, I have a less detailed introduction with an "Overview". Since you prefer to leave out the overview section, perhaps the sourced claim "The organization has more than 8,400 employees, as of 2020" could be moved into the introduction and "American" could be changed to "United States-based"? I think the introduction would benefit from mentioning the year of establishment and number of employees, but I will let you and other editors decide.

Thank you! JS at MITRE (talk) 19:23, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * ❌ I feel American is a better descriptor here; it is deeply connected with the American government, and while it has overseas operations, it's still an American company (see Mcdonald's which has plenty of overseas operations and is still described as American). As for the other request, the key part is that the infobox should summarize claims within the article body; the lead (which isn't part of the body) is meant to summarize the body as well. I'd be happy to add the number of employees to a section in the body. <b style="color: #fffb00">Zoozaz1</b> <b style="color: #fffb00">talk</b>  01:24, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Attack Flow Project
Should the "Projects" section of this page be updated to include mention of the Attack Flow Project? It hasn't gotten much attention in the press but as I understand it from this article on SDX Central, the project is a collaboration between multiple companies to create a common data format for identifying cyberthreats. The most detailed resources I can find are from MITRE itself and a MITRE employee so I'm not sure if those are reliable enough resources. But I think this is significant project.Michael Martinez (talk) 15:52, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Proposed update to "Leadership" section
Thanks again for your work in updating MITRE’s Wikipedia page last year! We’ve noticed that the "Leadership" section includes several members of our Board of Trustees who are no longer working with the company and have since been replaced. Zoozaz1, would you consider update the existing list with the text below, which includes URLs for third-party media references?

Current trustees include Mike Rogers (chairman), Maury W. Bradsher, George Campbell Jr., Lance Collins, Sue Gordon, George Halvorson, Paul G. Kaminski, Yvette Meléndez, Cathy Minehan, John H. Noseworthy, Adalio T. Sanchez, Rodney E. Slater, and Jan E. Tighe. Mike Rogers as chairman https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/11/22/mike-rogers-2024-gop-presidential-field/ Yvette Meléndez and Adalio T. Sanchez join the Board of Trustees https://washingtonexec.com/2018/11/mitre-board-of-trustees-members-elect-former-rep-mike-rogers-vice-chairman/ Maury Brasher joins Board of Trustees https://executivegov.com/2022/11/maury-bradsher-appointed-to-mitres-board-of-trustees-jason-providakes-quoted/ Thank you! JS at MITRE (talk) 20:15, 7 December 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅. Zoozaz1 (talk) 22:11, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Notes on the name
If you ask google, the name is an acronym for "MIT Research and Engineering" I could not verify this, so some time ago I wrote to MITRE and got a reply from Francis McLoughlin, MITRE's head spokesman and public relations. He stated:


 * The origin of the name MITRE is somewhat obscure. When the company was incorporated in 1958, the name was apparently chosen by James McCormack, Jr., who was one of the first five members of  MITRE's Board of Trustees. He sought a word that was essentially meaningless (and therefore had no potentially restrictive or pejorative connotations) while having an attractive "feel."   Some people have suggested that the origin of the name was the British spelling of the word for joining or fitting together, while others suggested the name was an acronym made up from MIT, Rand, Engineering, or various other things.   McCormack stoutly denied all these suggestions, and he was in the best position to know.  Suffice it to say that if MITRE had no meaning in the beginning, it means a lot to many people now.

I have tried to find a non-email version of this statement on occasion since then, because I think this is a small but important detail that should be in the article. Just today I finally found such a mention in a newspaper, and I will add that to the article, but I wanted to also post the statement from McLoughlin here on the talk page as well. Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:18, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Proposed updates to "Projects"
@Zoozaz1 Thanks again for your recent work in updating MITRE’s Wikipedia page with the current list of board members! For my next request, I’d like to update "Projects" section with information about our work in artificial intelligence, semiconductors, and marine technology to give readers a better understanding of what the company is doing in these areas. I've tried to be brief and neutral, using only reputable sources. Zoozaz1, would you consider updating that section with the text below, which includes URLs for third-party media references? Thank you! JS at MITRE (talk) 20:22, 10 November 2023 (UTC) Artificial Intelligence MITRE is working with government and industry to enhance trust in AI assurance help inform regulatory frameworks that address AI (. MITRE worked with Harris Poll on a public opinion survey showing that most U.S. residents are concerned about the safety and security of AI technology and are not willing to rely on it for everyday tasks . A second MITRE-Harris Poll survey on AI trends found that public trust in AI had declined further, with only 39% of U.S. adults believing that today’s AI technologies are safe and secure. And 85% support a nationwide effort across government, industry, and academia to make AI safe and secure . In May 2023, the National Science Foundation funded the creation of the AI Institute for Societal Decision Making (AI-SDM), which will create new AI tools to help improve U.S. response to challenges such as disaster management and public health . As part of the AI-SDM, MITRE is working to accelerate transition and adoption of AI solutions from the institute that are safe, equitable, and effective. MITRE is addressing cybersecurity concerns with AI and machine learning (ML) systems with MITRE ATLAS, a freely available knowledge base that identifies tactics and attack types that adversaries may use against AI and ML systems. MITRE worked with Microsoft to develop the Arsenal plug-in, which cybersecurity teams can use to automate adversary behavior as they prepare for attacks on AI and machine learning systems. In healthcare, MITRE co-founded the Coalition for Health AI (CHAI), which published a blueprint for industry (FOX) ‘guidelines and guardrails’ to drive adoption of credible, fair and transparent health AI systems in the advent of large language models and generative AI capabilities.” Semiconductors In 2021, MITRE Engenuity established the Semiconductor Alliance, which includes companies such as Intel, Micron, and Analog Devices, to help guide U.S government investments in semiconductor research and development. MITRE Engenuity and the Semiconductor Alliance have published papers with recommendations for how the United States can best focus its spending from the CHIPS and Science Act, and have recommended that the investment focus on funding cooperative research, rather than innovation by single companies that would be protective of the resulting intellectual property. MITRE plays a leading role in the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition, which was awarded $19.7 million from the Department of Defense’s Microelectronics Commons program to advance DoD’s microelectronics needs while creating new jobs, workforce training opportunities and investment in the region's advanced manufacturing and technology centers. Marine Technology In 2021, MITRE announced the construction of a bluetech lab in Bedford, Mass., that would help the company research new marine technologies. The lab will include a 620,000-gallon test tank, more than 100 feet long, 20 feet deep, and 40 feet wide. The lab is outfitted with communications and acoustics sensors, and is open to outside researchers to use. In June, 2023, Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey announced a $2 million grant to MITRE to create a national marine data network and develop a workforce development program for the blue economy. The network, called BlueNERVE, connects marine testing resources and data to improve collaboration. Partners in the BlueNERVE network include Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, University of Massachusetts, Northeastern University, MassChallenge and the University of Rhode Island. JS at MITRE (talk) 20:22, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I have issues with what I see is vague promotional wording that contains conclusions about the companies effectiveness MITRE is working with government and industry to enhance trust in AI assurance and MITRE plays a leading role in the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition as well as statements which seem to be future-based (I e., facilities that have not been built yet The lab will  include a 620,000-gallon test tank, more than 100 feet long, 20 feet deep, and 40 feet wide and MITRE announced the construction of a bluetech lab in Bedford, Mass.,  that would help  the company research new marine technologies). I think the COI editor needs to prune back some of these promotional phrases and omit anything that speaks to things that have not been fully realized or aren't presently built. Regards,  Spintendo  22:50, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time out to consider the requested additions to the MITRE article with new projects in marine technology, AI and semiconductors. I’ve made changes to the draft text intended to avoid language that may be perceived as promotional and to reflect that the marine technology lab is now open. I’ve also proposed an addition to the Etymology section intended to address some of the discussion on the talk page. Could you take another look at the text and let me know if you’d like to see any further changes before implementing it?
 * Thank you! ~
 * Etymology
 * The name MITRE was created by James McCormack Jr., one of the original board members. The name is not an acronym, although various claims that it is can be found online. Originally always seen in upper case, MITRE began using normal capitalization around the time of the Mitretek spinoff, but both forms can still be widely found as of 2023.
 * In 2023, MIT Technology Review studied hundreds of archival documents and could not determine the origin of MITRE’s name. Technology Review quoted one historian as saying that the company’s incorporators chose the name “MITRE” because it was the French spelling of the English word “miter,” a smooth joining of two pieces. While many people have speculated that the name is an acronym for “MIT Research and Engineering,” the article notes that would have been unlikely, as MIT’s then-provost preferred to disassociate the university from MITRE’s work on the Semi-Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE) system for the U.S. military.
 * Marine Technology
 * MITRE opened a marine technology “blue tech” research lab in November 2023 that includes a 620,000-gallon test tank, more than 100 feet long, 20 feet deep, and 40 feet wide. The lab is outfitted with communications and acoustics sensors, and is open to outside researchers to use.
 * In June 2023, Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey announced a $2 million grant to MITRE to create a national marine data network and develop a workforce development program for the blue economy . The network, called BlueNERVE, connects marine testing resources and data to improve collaboration. Partners in the BlueNERVE network include Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, University of Massachusetts, Northeastern University, MassChallenge and the University of Rhode Island.
 * Artificial Intelligence
 * MITRE is working with government and industry to develop security tools to help protect AI-enabled systems, as well as AI-enabled decision-making tools that are safe, equitable, and effective.
 * In May 2023, the National Science Foundation funded the creation of the AI Institute for Societal Decision Making (AI-SDM), which is creating new AI tools to help improve U.S. response to challenges such as disaster management and public health. As part of the AI-SDM, MITRE is working to accelerate transition and adoption of AI solutions from the institute.
 * MITRE is addressing cybersecurity concerns with AI and machine learning (ML) systems with MITRE ATLAS, a freely available knowledge base that identifies tactics and attack types that adversaries may use against AI and ML systems . MITRE worked with Microsoft to develop the Arsenal plug-in, which cybersecurity teams can use to automate adversary behavior as they prepare for attacks on AI and machine learning systems.
 * In healthcare, MITRE co-founded the Coalition for Health AI (CHAI), which published a blueprint
 * for industry  ‘guidelines and guardrails’ to drive adoption of credible, fair and transparent health AI systems in the advent of large language models and generative AI capabilities.”
 * “[A] survey from the MITRE Corporation and the Harris Poll claims that just 39% of 2,063 U.S. adults polled believe that today’s AI tech is ‘safe and secure,’ a drop of 9% from when the two firms conducted their last survey in November 2022.” The survey also found that 85% want to see a nationwide effort across industry, government, and academia to make AI safe and secure for public use..
 * Semiconductors
 * MITRE is part of the advisory group leading the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition, which was awarded $19.7 million from the Department of Defense’s Microelectronics Commons program to advance DoD’s microelectronics needs while creating new jobs, workforce training opportunities and investment in the region's advanced manufacturing and technology centers.
 * In 2021, MITRE Engenuity established the Semiconductor Alliance, which includes companies such as Intel, Micron, and Analog Devices, to help guide U.S government investments in semiconductor research and development . The Semiconductor Alliance has published papers with recommendations for how the United States can best focus its spending from the CHIPS and Science Act, and have recommended that the investment focus on funding cooperative research, rather than innovation by single companies that would be protective of the resulting intellectual property . JS at MITRE (talk) 16:42, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time out to consider the requested additions to the MITRE article with new projects in marine technology, AI and semiconductors. I’ve made changes to the draft text intended to avoid language that may be perceived as promotional and to reflect that the marine technology lab is now open. I’ve also proposed an addition to the Etymology section intended to address some of the discussion on the talk page. Could you take another look at the text and let me know if you’d like to see any further changes before implementing it?
 * Thank you! JS at MITRE (talk) 15:52, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Etymology
 * The name MITRE was created by James McCormack Jr., one of the original board members. The name is not an acronym, although various claims that it is can be found online. Originally always seen in upper case, MITRE began using normal capitalization around the time of the Mitretek spinoff, but both forms can still be widely found as of 2023.
 * In 2023, MIT Technology Review studied hundreds of archival documents and could not determine the origin of MITRE’s name. Technology Review quoted one historian as saying that the company’s incorporators chose the name “MITRE” because it was the French spelling of the English word “miter,” a smooth joining of two pieces. While many people have speculated that the name is an acronym for “MIT Research and Engineering,” the article notes that would have been unlikely, as MIT’s then-provost preferred to disassociate the university from MITRE’s work on the Semi-Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE) system for the U.S. military.
 * Marine Technology
 * MITRE opened a marine technology “blue tech” research lab in November 2023 that includes a 620,000-gallon test tank, more than 100 feet long, 20 feet deep, and 40 feet wide. The lab is outfitted with communications and acoustics sensors, and is open to outside researchers to use.
 * In June 2023, Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey announced a $2 million grant to MITRE to create a national marine data network and develop a workforce development program for the blue economy . The network, called BlueNERVE, connects marine testing resources and data to improve collaboration. Partners in the BlueNERVE network include Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, University of Massachusetts, Northeastern University, MassChallenge and the University of Rhode Island.
 * Artificial Intelligence
 * MITRE is working with government and industry to develop security tools to help protect AI-enabled systems, as well as AI-enabled decision-making tools that are safe, equitable, and effective.
 * In May 2023, the National Science Foundation funded the creation of the AI Institute for Societal Decision Making (AI-SDM), which is creating new AI tools to help improve U.S. response to challenges such as disaster management and public health. As part of the AI-SDM, MITRE is working to accelerate transition and adoption of AI solutions from the institute.
 * MITRE is addressing cybersecurity concerns with AI and machine learning (ML) systems with MITRE ATLAS, a freely available knowledge base that identifies tactics and attack types that adversaries may use against AI and ML systems . MITRE worked with Microsoft to develop the Arsenal plug-in, which cybersecurity teams can use to automate adversary behavior as they prepare for attacks on AI and machine learning systems.
 * In healthcare, MITRE co-founded the Coalition for Health AI (CHAI), which published a blueprint
 * for industry  ‘guidelines and guardrails’ to drive adoption of credible, fair and transparent health AI systems in the advent of large language models and generative AI capabilities.”
 * “[A] survey from the MITRE Corporation and the Harris Poll claims that just 39% of 2,063 U.S. adults polled believe that today’s AI tech is ‘safe and secure,’ a drop of 9% from when the two firms conducted their last survey in November 2022.” The survey also found that 85% want to see a nationwide effort across industry, government, and academia to make AI safe and secure for public use..
 * Semiconductors
 * MITRE is part of the advisory group leading the Northeast Microelectronics Coalition, which was awarded $19.7 million from the Department of Defense’s Microelectronics Commons program to advance DoD’s microelectronics needs while creating new jobs, workforce training opportunities and investment in the region's advanced manufacturing and technology centers.
 * In 2021, MITRE Engenuity established the Semiconductor Alliance, which includes companies such as Intel, Micron, and Analog Devices, to help guide U.S government investments in semiconductor research and development . The Semiconductor Alliance has published papers with recommendations for how the United States can best focus its spending from the CHIPS and Science Act, and have recommended that the investment focus on funding cooperative research, rather than innovation by single companies that would be protective of the resulting intellectual property . JS at MITRE (talk) 15:52, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * @Spintendo Just wanted to check in and see if you have any thoughts on the proposed revisions, and if there’s anything within that text that you’d like to see changed? Thanks again for your consideration!
 * JS at MITRE (talk) 19:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC)