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.
By Nitesh V. Chawla, Paulo Benanti
arXiv:2607. 17225v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic AI systems do not just predict or recommend; they plan, maintain state, and act in external environments with varying degrees of autonomy.
By Chetan Arora, Andreas Vogelsang, Abbi Sharma
arXiv:2606. 26117v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This paper introduces the Governance Inversion Hypothesis (GIH) to explain a growing paradox in artificial intelligence (AI) governance: under conditions of increasing regulatory expansion and technological complexity, organisations may become more formally governed while simultaneously experiencing a decline in operational control over AI systems.
By Victor Frimpong
arXiv:2510.16853v4 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Autonomous AI agents capable of complex planning and action mark a shift beyond today's generative tools. As these systems enter political an...
By Matthew Sharp, Omer Bilgin, Iason Gabriel, Lewis Hammond
arXiv:2608. 12104v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The increasing deployment of autonomous, agentic AI systems challenges traditional accountability mechanisms.
By Long Hoang Nguyen, Eva Sp\"athe, Sebastian Lins, Ali Sunyaev
arXiv:2607. 23438v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As AI systems increasingly exhibit agentic behavior, discussions of autonomy often conflate what systems are technically capable of doing with what they should be permitted to do in practice.
By Haining Zheng, Qian Dong, Rodolfo K. Depena, Jonathan D. Bhatia, Feng Xiao, Peng Xu
arXiv:2607. 07612v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Artificial intelligence is rapidly evolving from generative systems to agentic AI capable of autonomously planning and executing tasks.
By Mubarak Raji, Masooda Bashir
arXiv:2608. 20041v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Research on the agency of advanced artificial intelligence (AI) systems focuses on agency as a normative concept and on the agency of particularly agentic AI systems.
By Willem Fourie
The paper argues that the commonly cited gap between ethical principles and AI practice is not merely a matter of implementation or compliance, but arises from the complex institutional and professional contexts in which AI actors operate. Through interviews with designers and governors of anti‑trafficking AI systems, it identifies four interconnected moments—perception, judgement, situated action, and socio‑technical materialisation—through which ethical concerns are recognised, weighed, and either realised or sidelined. The authors contend that responsible AI governance must build epistemic infrastructures that transcend these constraints, enabling the knowledge of affected communities and potential harms to be effectively integrated into design and governance.
By Thao Do Ngoc, Emma Carmel
A framework for aligning agentic AI with enterprise intent to ensure consistent scenario‑wide autonomous behavior. The post The Three Dimensions of Custom Agentic Alignment: Purpose, Principles and Practices appeared first on Towards Data Science .
By Gadi Singer
arXiv:2609.21192v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Organizations deploying agentic artificial intelligence must determine more than whether a model is trustworthy; they must establish what to validate,...
By John Cuneo, David Chun, Gaurav Khanna