Artificial Intelligence Index Report 2026
arXiv:2606. 15708v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Welcome to the ninth edition of the AI Index report.
arXiv:2608. 15326v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) benchmarks are not neutral tools of evaluation but socio-technical artefacts that shape competition, power, and research priorities within AI.
arXiv:2606. 15708v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Welcome to the ninth edition of the AI Index report.
The paper argues that AI should be evaluated not only by principles but by concrete protocols that translate commitments into roles, requirements, records, oversight, and assessment. It introduces a rupture test linking institutional baselines to system evaluation, and distinguishes evidence‑bounded deployment from measurement‑bounded governance. The authors propose the RISE AI architecture to make bounded, evidence‑based claims about Responsibility, Inclusivity, Safety, and Empowerment, emphasizing the need for engineering, institutional repair, and ongoing moral judgment.
arXiv:2608. 12104v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The increasing deployment of autonomous, agentic AI systems challenges traditional accountability mechanisms.
arXiv:2608. 08408v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Logics of abstraction in computational AI research often push important forms of knowledge and reflection aside: dominant standards of legitimacy separate from lived experience of harm; the goals of work misalign with the practices that operationalize them; and career demands crowd out critical reflection.
arXiv:2606. 31755v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Research on artificial intelligence (AI) in the public sector often treats "AI" as a single category, neglecting technical distinctions between different AI systems.
arXiv:2606. 09408v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We present an ethnographic study of an alternative approach to data work, developed by a civic-tech initiative that builds datasets for training and benchmarking online safety systems.
arXiv:2608. 14565v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI safety research has mainly focused on two areas: technical alignment (ensuring AI systems produce human-aligned outputs) and the regulation of generative AI's societal impacts (including unemployment risk and labor market disruption).
arXiv:2607. 14782v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Grounded in human rights-based frameworks such as the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, the Global Index on Responsible AI (GIRAI) examines how countries translate responsible AI commitments into enforceable protections, institutional capacity, and redress mechanisms.
arXiv:2608. 11251v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Fairness in AI systems has become more important with recent regulatory demands, such as the EU AI Act.
The study tests deliberately biased AI assistants and finds that such bias improves human performance on tasks like misinformation evaluation, financial investment, and graduate education compared to neutral AI. However, participants undervalue biased AI and overvalue neutral AI, even when performance is similar. When two AI biases flank a participant’s perspective, performance gains are maintained while reducing the perceived cost and one‑sided influence.
arXiv:2607. 18943v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: General intelligence, of the kind that underwrites the full range of human cognitive achievement, is not a property of computational architecture alone.
How can humans make sense of the rapid takeoff of artificial intelligence (AI)? We studied the sensemaking dynamics of AI through an open-ended, mixed-methods study with computational text analysis of...