FigureAsia 35 Under 35 · AI
Divya Siddarth
Age 29 · Institution builder and governance researcher · United States and United Kingdom; civic-evaluation programmes spanning multiple regions
Building Democratic Institutions for Decisions About Artificial Intelligence
- Age at the edition eligibility date
- 29
- Field
- Participatory AI governance and collective intelligence
- Country or region
- United States and United Kingdom; civic-evaluation programmes spanning multiple regions
- FigureAsia U35 Assessment
- 86.5 / 100
Profile
Career and documented record
Divya Siddarth is developing practical ways for public judgment to enter the design and evaluation of AI. Her work turns deliberation into datasets, evaluation criteria and institutional processes, seeking technological governance that reflects lived experience rather than expert preference alone.
Divya Siddarth approaches AI governance as an institutional-design problem: if systems will mediate public life, the public needs credible ways to shape what those systems are asked to optimise. As Co-Founder and Executive Director of the Collective Intelligence Project, she has helped build deliberative processes that translate diverse views into research and evaluation artefacts. The organisation’s 2025 Global Dialogues Index drew on seven rounds involving more than 6,000 participants across 70 countries, examining how people use AI, where trust accumulates and where expectations diverge. Its Weval platform takes a complementary route, enabling communities and domain specialists to construct qualitative evaluations around situated concerns that standard benchmarks often miss. In India, the organisation’s Samiksha programme reported more than 25,000 queries in 11 languages and over 100,000 manual evaluations across health, agriculture, education and law. Siddarth’s contribution is best understood as institution-building rather than personal authorship of every output. She has helped give public participation a technical pathway—from deliberation, to criteria, to tests that developers and public authorities can use.
FigureAsia selection
Why Divya Siddarth is on the list
FigureAsia selected Siddarth because she is addressing a neglected question in AI governance: how collective judgment becomes operational rather than ceremonial. Her work links public deliberation to the concrete evaluation of model behaviour and gives communities a means to define context-specific standards. The scale and geographic spread of Global Dialogues, alongside India-focused multilingual evaluation, demonstrate unusual ambition. This is a selection for institution-building and methodological direction. Credit remains shared with her co-founder, project leads, partner organisations, participants and the wider team.
Verified work
The 2025–26 record
Verified contribution 01
Under Siddarth’s executive leadership, the 2025 Global Dialogues Index synthesised seven deliberative rounds with more than 6,000 participants across 70 countries; these are programme-level figures.
Verified contribution 02
Co-led the development of Weval as open infrastructure for contextual, community-generated AI evaluation, including work on cultural competence, mental-health safety and regional legal reasoning.
Verified contribution 03
Oversaw the organisation during Samiksha’s 2025 India launch; the programme reports 25,000-plus queries in 11 languages and more than 100,000 manual evaluations, all organisation-reported metrics.
Field context
The work in its field
Global Dialogues reports participation across 70 countries, while project materials describe use by laboratories, safety institutes and public bodies spanning Asia, Europe, Africa and North America. The work is designed as reusable civic infrastructure rather than a jurisdiction-specific consultation exercise.
Samiksha and related work in India, Sri Lanka and Taiwan place Asian languages, institutions and public priorities inside the evaluation process rather than at its margins.
FigureAsia U35 Assessment
Assessment breakdown
86.5out of 100
Defining contribution
21.8 / 25
A completed piece of work, institution or system that materially changes what the field can do.
Demonstrated impact and reach
16.4 / 20
Observable adoption, scientific use, policy consequence or operational reach, with self-reported metrics labelled as such.
Personal agency and attribution
13.2 / 15
Evidence that the individual shaped the result, separated from team, employer and investor halo.
Technical or institutional originality
13.5 / 15
A new method, product form, research direction, governance mechanism or deployment model.
Durability and field-shaping influence
8.5 / 10
The likelihood that the contribution will remain useful beyond a single news cycle or model release.
Evidence integrity and responsible practice
8.4 / 10
The quality of the record, the precision of claims and the seriousness with which limitations and harms are addressed.
Asia–world relevance
4.7 / 5
A documented connection to Asia, impact on Asian systems, or clear importance to the region’s place in the international field.