arXiv:2606. 24224v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Despite the extensive discussions of human-centric AI (HCAI) in Industry 5.
Despite the extensive discussions of human-centric AI (HCAI) in Industry 5. 0, its effects on firms' idiosyncratic risks (IR) remains underexplored.
arXiv:2407. 10247v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into corporate strategy has become critical for organizations seeking to maintain competitive advantage in the digital age.
arXiv:2607. 02197v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The society and emerging risk-based regulatory frameworks for AI underscore the need for rigorous risk assessment to ensure safe and reliable AI systems.
arXiv:2508. 09219v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recent advances in AI applications have raised growing concerns about the need for ethical guidelines and regulations to mitigate the risks posed by these technologies.
arXiv:2606. 15485v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic AI systems act autonomously, use tools, adapt to context, and operate in complex real-world environments.
arXiv:2608. 10431v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Responsible AI (RAI) has become a central concern for technology companies, regulators, and the public.
arXiv:2607. 15992v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Over the past decade, responsible AI (RAI) has produced a substantial body of practice for identifying and mitigating the risks AI poses in high-stakes settings.
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.
Over the past decade, responsible AI (RAI) has produced a substantial body of practice for identifying and mitigating the risks AI poses in high-stakes settings. Yet this work has not produced a market that rewards trustworthiness.
The study investigates how exposure to buyers’ artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled environmental governance affects supplier environmental controversies. Using text analysis and panel data from 2,505 suppliers of U.S.-listed firms across 41 countries (2020‑2024), the authors find that such exposure is negatively associated with controversies in the following year. The effect is stronger in countries with higher AI readiness and regulatory quality.
The paper systematically classifies the EU AI Act’s high‑risk requirements, finding that only a minority directly address AI‑specific risk sources while most impose organizational and documentation obligations. From these risk‑related requirements, the authors derive a consolidated list of distinct AI‑specific risk sources, creating an EU AI Act Risk Source List. This list aims to bridge the gap between legal obligations and AI risk‑management practice by providing a structured reference for comparing the Act’s implicit risk coverage with existing AI risk taxonomies.
arXiv:2607. 20781v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming organizations, raising a fundamental organizational and economic question: when will a human employee be replaced by AI?