← Back to all news
arXiv AI By Oier Mentxaka, Natalia D\'iaz-Rodr\'iguez, Mark Coeckelbergh, Marcos L\'opez de Prado, Emilia G\'omez, David Fern\'andez Llorca, Enrique Herrera-Viedma, Francisco Herrera

Trustworthy AI and Democracy: A Dual Taxonomy and Operational Framework of Democratic Risks and Contributions

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The paper introduces the AIRD/AIPD framework, a dual taxonomy that categorises AI’s democratic risks (threats to autonomy, fairness, public discourse, institutions, and trust) and its positive contributions (enhancing efficiency, accessibility, security, informed citizenry, transparency, accountability, inclusive dialogue, and evidence‑based policymaking). Grounded in democratic principles and the European Commission’s Trustworthy AI requirements, the framework offers an operational process for identifying contexts, classifying effects, mapping to governance mechanisms, and defining responsible actors, illustrated with examples on electoral misinformation and public service allocation.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

Related stories

arXiv AI
Aug 20

Global Index on Responsible AI 2026 : Conceptual Framework and Methodology

The Global Index on Responsible AI 2026 (GIRAI) 2nd Edition refines its predecessor by distinguishing between framework existence and implementation, expanding from three to five thematic areas, and adding granular variables for framework quality. It evaluates responsible AI governance across five dimensions—Inclusion and Diversity, Ethics and Sustainability, Labour and Skills, Trust and Safety, and Use of AI in Public Service—using 38 indicators organized into three pillars: AI Policy, CSO Engagement, and Enabling Conditions, plus a separate Use of Unacceptable Risk AI penalty. Data from 135 country-level researchers and secondary sources are normalized to a 100-point scale, weighted by pillar importance, and used to facilitate systematic cross‑national comparisons for policymakers, civil society, and AI developers.

By Fola Adeleke, Rachel Adams, Ayantola Alayande, Daniela Benavente, Ana Florido, Nicol\'as Grossman, Leah Junck
safety
More like this →
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 11

From Protocols to Evidence: Bounded Claims for AI in Service of the Common Good

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
safety
More like this →
arXiv AI
Jul 17

Global Index on Responsible AI: 2026 Report

arXiv:2607. 14782v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Grounded in human rights-based frameworks such as the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, the Global Index on Responsible AI (GIRAI) examines how countries translate responsible AI commitments into enforceable protections, institutional capacity, and redress mechanisms.

By Rachel Adams, Fola Adeleke, Ayantola Alayande, Selamawit Engida Abdella, Ana Florido, Nicol\'as Grossman, Leah Junck
safety
More like this →