arXiv:2608. 16470v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We examine the worldwide trend of mandatory labeling of generative artificial intelligence(GenAI) as a reactive, symbolic form of legislation triggered by technological panic and institutional responses.
arXiv:2606. 00621v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generative artificial intelligence has fundamentally changed how content is now produced.
arXiv:2606. 12423v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into critical infrastructure including healthcare, finance, energy, and defense, offers transformative benefits but also conflicts with evolving regulatory and governance frameworks.
arXiv:2601.04094v4 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Effective regulation of AI is a defining policy challenge, driven by their integration into all aspects of society. To remain responsive to their rap...
arXiv:2607. 24391v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI systems already govern.
The paper argues that AI governance should rely on ISO-like interoperability protocols rather than solely on jurisdiction-specific laws. It proposes standardized AI nutrition labels that include metrics for bias, energy usage, and data provenance to enable machine‑readable risk communication across borders. These protocols aim to reduce regulatory fragmentation, lower barriers for SMEs, and build public trust while allowing modular evolution with technology.
arXiv:2609.37109v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The rapid, unpredictable advancements in AI system capabilities has seen regulators take adaptive and experimental approaches to policymaking. Establ...
arXiv:2607. 21345v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Regulating activities where regulatees use autonomous and agentic AI is challenging.
arXiv:2606. 12437v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The increasing encroachment of artificial intelligence (AI) on social life raises significant risks for society, particularly within the infospheres created and controlled by companies such as Google, Facebook, Apple, and Amazon.
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.
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.
arXiv:2607. 15480v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As artificial intelligence (AI) systems increasingly impact society, ensuring their ethical and trustworthy deployment has become a global priority.
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.