Evidence record 10536 · automatically gathered

Final Authority in AI Governance: Frontier-Provider Sovereignty and Action-Centered Deployer Governance

arXiv:2607.13040v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This paper examines where final authority should sit once capable AI systems are embedded in organizational workflows. It compares two governance models. The first, frontier-provider sovereignty, assigns privileged authority to the provider of the most capable models and is reflected in contemporary arguments for frontier-model testing, release gating, transparency duties, and compute-related controls. The second, action-centered deployer sovereign

Record details

Published: 16 July 2026
Source: arXiv cs.CY
Category: Research
Topics: Regulation · Transparency
Retrieved: 16 July 2026

source-onlyevidence status

These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.

How to cite this record

ethics.ai (16 July 2026), “Final Authority in AI Governance: Frontier-Provider Sovereignty and Action-Centered Deployer Governance,” evidence record 10536, https://ethics.ai/record/10536 (originally published by arXiv cs.CY).

JSON

Use and limitations

This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.