TRAIN Act seeks greater transparency in generative artificial intelligence training

A new bipartisan TRAIN Act in the US House of Representatives aims to increase transparency and responsibility around generative artificial intelligence training practices. The proposal reflects growing congressional focus on how artificial intelligence systems are developed and governed.

Representatives Madeleine Dean, a Democrat from Pennsylvania, and Nathaniel Moran, a Republican from Texas, introduced a bipartisan bill in the US House of Representatives called the Transparency and Responsibility for Artificial Intelligence Networks (TRAIN) Act. The measure targets transparency in generative artificial intelligence training practices, signaling heightened legislative attention to how foundation models and related systems are created and maintained. By focusing specifically on training, the proposal addresses a critical phase in the development of generative artificial intelligence tools where data selection, labeling and governance decisions can have far reaching consequences.

The legislative objective of the TRAIN Act is to promote clearer disclosure and accountability around the methods and data used to train generative artificial intelligence models. Although detailed provisions are not visible in the available text, the focus on transparency and responsibility indicates that policymakers are scrutinizing issues such as the provenance of training data, the potential inclusion of copyrighted or sensitive information, and the ways in which system developers document and explain their training pipelines. The bipartisan sponsorship highlights that concern over generative artificial intelligence training practices cuts across party lines and is emerging as a shared priority in technology policy.

By introducing the TRAIN Act in the House of Representatives, lawmakers are positioning transparency in generative artificial intelligence training as a core element of emerging regulatory frameworks for advanced computational systems. The proposal underscores expectations that organizations developing generative artificial intelligence will provide more information about their training processes to regulators, business customers and potentially the public. It also suggests that future compliance obligations for artificial intelligence developers may extend beyond model outputs to include how models are built, trained and updated over time, reflecting a broader shift toward lifecycle oversight of artificial intelligence technologies.

55

Impact Score

Key legal shifts for in house counsel across artificial intelligence, data and governance

In house legal teams in the UK and EU are facing a fast changing mix of artificial intelligence regulation, data protection reform, employment law overhaul and evolving corporate governance expectations. Recent moves on the EU Artificial Intelligence Act, UK data adequacy, domestic data reform and virtual shareholder meetings will shape legal risk and compliance strategies over the coming years.

Five trends shaping Artificial Intelligence infrastructure in 2026

Data center operators face rising complexity as liquid cooling, regulation, supply constraints, edge inference and sovereign Artificial Intelligence strategies converge. Success increasingly depends on specialized expertise, partnerships and careful workload placement.

Contact Us

Got questions? Use the form to contact us.

Contact Form

Clicking next sends a verification code to your email. After verifying, you can enter your message.