An Instrument to Evaluate Governance Proposals: AI Policy Analysis at Scale
This paper introduces a policy analysis framework for systematic, transparent assessment of AI governance proposals in an evolving and contested regulatory landscape. AI policy debates often collapse into binary positions that obscure underlying tradeoffs and normative assumptions. The framework structures policy analysis around multiple policy attributes, allowing users to surface priorities and tensions without prescribing outcomes. We use a mixed-methods approach that integrates qualitative i
Record details
Published: 30 July 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Regulation · Transparency
Retrieved: 31 July 2026
Related evidence
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.
Scaling, Lock-In, and Proxy Compliance: A Political Economy of Responsible AI
arXiv · 30 July 2026
AISPA: User-Centric System Prompt Auditing for Large Language Model Applications
arXiv cs.HC · 30 July 2026
AISPA: User-Centric System Prompt Auditing for Large Language Model Applications
arXiv · 30 July 2026
Algorithmic transparency and citizen trust in digital governance: A cross-national analysis of AI adoption in public services
Technology in Society · 30 July 2026
The Human Utility Factor: A Computable Welfare Metric That Reframes AI Governance as a Constrained Optimisation Problem
arXiv cs.CY · 30 July 2026
Trust by design in AI-augmented procurement systems: the roles of explainability, governance, and human oversight
Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · 31 July 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (30 July 2026), “An Instrument to Evaluate Governance Proposals: AI Policy Analysis at Scale,” evidence record 14946, https://ethics.ai/record/14946 (originally published by arXiv).
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.