Incentive Aware AI Regulations: A Credal Characterisation
arXiv:2603. 05175v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The rapid proliferation of AI applications has intensified debate on effective regulation of these black-box services.
arXiv:2508. 07872v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Uncertainty in artificial intelligence (AI) predictions raises pressing legal and ethical questions for AI-assisted decision-making.
arXiv:2603. 05175v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The rapid proliferation of AI applications has intensified debate on effective regulation of these black-box services.
arXiv:2608. 13618v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A single clinical algorithm can deliver unequal accuracy across patient groups, and concern about such disparity has grown as artificial intelligence (AI) spreads through clinical decision-making.
arXiv:2603.19042v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into judicial decision making -- particularly in pretrial, sentencing, and parole contexts -- has g...
arXiv:2607. 05680v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI systems are increasingly used to provide legal advice, raising questions about whether laypeople accept guidance from algorithms--especially when that advice is legally correct but socially controversial.
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 paper discusses how autonomous AI systems are moving from advisory to agentic roles in medication prescribing, citing recent U.S. legislation and a Utah pilot program. It argues that three architectural features—calibrated per‑prediction confidence, clear differentiation between epistemic and aleatoric uncertainty, and inferential transparency—are essential for safe autonomous prescribing. A survey of 136 U.S. clinicians shows they require a confidence‑based escalation mechanism, prefer different handling of uncertainty types, and will only accept liability when transparency allows informed decision‑making.
arXiv:2610.01005v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As artificial intelligence is increasingly deployed, algorithmic unfairness has raised growing concerns and intensified demands for transparent fairnes...
arXiv:2310. 04585v5 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: I study statistical discrimination driven by verifiable beliefs, such as those generated by machine learning, rather than by humans.
arXiv:2609.07959v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Machine learning models are widely used in clinical applications, social media, law enforcement and critical infrastructure. Verifying whether their...
arXiv:2608. 03114v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into medical decision-making, yet its liability implications remain complex, particularly when physicians differ in diagnostic skills and their quality is unobservable.
arXiv:2507. 20708v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The rapid deployment of AI systems in high-stakes domains, including those classified as high-risk under the The EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689), has intensified the need for reliable compliance auditing.
arXiv:2407. 14766v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: This paper presents a philosophical and experimental study of fairness interventions in AI classification, centered on the explainability and transparency of corrective methods, and on the opposition between two fairness criteria, namely Demographic Parity and Equalized Odds.