arXiv:2604. 09998v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have recently emerged as promising tools for augmenting Security Operations Center (SOC) workflows, with vendors increasingly marketing autonomous AI solutions for SOCs.
By Souradip Nath, Chih-Yi Huang, Aditi Ganapathi, Kashyap Thimmaraju, Jaron Mink, Gail-Joon Ahn
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.
By Michael Papademas, Xenia Ziouvelou, Kostas Karpouzis, Vangelis Karkaletsis
The paper reviews secondary studies and research agendas on generative AI (GenAI) in information systems, synthesizing evidence from 28 selected papers. It identifies GenAI’s transformative benefits—productivity, innovation, personalization, and democratized expertise—while highlighting challenges such as technical unreliability, ethical risks, and governance gaps. The authors propose a research agenda that shifts IS scholarship toward shaping the co‑evolution of AI capabilities with organizational routines, societal values, and regulatory institutions, emphasizing hybrid human‑AI ensembles, situated validation, design principles for probabilistic systems, and adaptive governance.
By Aleksander Jarz\k{e}bowicz, Adam Przyby{\l}ek, Jacinto Estima, Yen Ying Ng, Jakub Swacha, Beata Zielosko, Lech Madeyski, Noel Carroll, Kai-Kristian Kemell, Bartosz Marcinkowski, Alberto Rodrigues da Silva, Viktoria Stray, Netta Iivari, Anh Nguyen-Duc, Jorge Melegati, Boris Deliba\v{s}i\'c, Emilio Insfran
arXiv:2606. 00621v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generative artificial intelligence has fundamentally changed how content is now produced.
By Shubhashis Sengupta, Benjamin McCarty, Milind Savagaonkar, Rhine Andotra
arXiv:2606. 14594v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI-assisted software development has moved from line-level autocomplete to agents that can plan changes, edit files, and submit pull requests with limited human supervision.
By Jassem Manita, Aziz Amari
The paper presents LAAF, a Layered Accountability Architecture Framework for Large Language Model (LLM) applications, developed through a systematic review of 122 primary studies and 12 regulatory documents. It identifies five dimensions of accountability and four families of mechanisms—technical controls, human oversight, organisational governance, and documentation/traceability—each assessed for maturity. The framework is mapped onto major regulatory standards (EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001) and highlights persistent gaps such as under‑specified human oversight and lack of shared accountability metrics.
arXiv:2607. 03233v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The rapid growth of publicly available digital information has rendered manual open-source intelligence (OSINT) analysis insufficient for modern intelligence, cybersecurity, and cyber investigation.
By Eduardo Almeida Palmieri, Mohamed Chahine Ghanem, Dipo Dunsin, Zubair Baig, Ed de Quincey, Kim-Kwang Raymond Choo
The paper proposes a new interdisciplinary field called Cognitive Infrastructure Studies (CIS) to examine how AI systems act as invisible, foundational cognitive infrastructures that shape what people can know and do in digital societies. It argues that these infrastructures, through anticipatory personalization and adaptive invisibility, automate relevance judgments and shift epistemic agency to non‑human systems. CIS offers methodological tools, such as infrastructure breakdown experiments, to uncover the hidden cognitive dependencies created by AI preprocessing across individual, collective, and societal levels.
By Giuseppe Riva
The paper introduces LAAF, a Layered Accountability Architecture Framework for Large Language Model (LLM) applications, developed through a systematic review of 122 primary studies and 12 regulatory documents. It identifies five accountability dimensions and four families of mechanisms—technical controls, human oversight, organisational governance, and documentation/traceability—evaluated across maturity levels. The framework maps onto major standards such as the EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, and sectoral guidance, highlighting gaps in human oversight, accountability metrics, disciplinary alignment, and empirical validation.
By Prachi Chaturvedi, Shahnawaz Ahmad, Ehsan Nowroozi, Muhammad Waqas, George Loukas, Alireza Jolfaei, Lucas Cordeiro, Pierre Dantas
The paper "Operationalising AI Regulatory Sandboxes: Activities, Requirements, and Technical Assessment under the EU AI Act" outlines a detailed framework for implementing AI Regulatory Sandboxes (AIRS) under the EU AI Act. It maps the sandbox lifecycle into 29 activities, distinguishes between a Core AIRS and an Extended AIRS that includes an AI Technical Sandbox (AITS), and derives 15 infrastructural and governance requirements linked to these activities and provider obligations. The authors also introduce the Sandbox Configurator, an open‑source tool to instantiate AITS environments, aiming to provide structured workflows for regulators, robust evaluation methods for experts, and a transparent compliance pathway for AI providers.
By Alessio Buscemi, Thibault Simonetto, Daniele Pagani, German Castignani, Maxime Cordy, Jordi Cabot
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.
By Oren Perez, Nurit Wimer
arXiv:2607. 18483v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The digital substrate of states -- data, algorithms, infrastructure, platforms, applications -- is being governed without adequate conceptual foundations.
By Zeynep Engin, Tim Gordon, Viviana Bastidas, Tom Crick, Jon Crowcroft, Jean-Martin Denis, David J. Hand, Lauren Maffeo, Jakob M\"okander, Irene Ng, Anastasija Nikiforova, Giulio Quaggiotto, David Uriel Socol de la Osa, Rhonda Syler, Philip Treleaven, Stefaan Verhulst