Toward Responsible and Beneficial AI: Comparing Regulatory and Guidance-Based Approaches -A Comprehensive Comparative Analysis of Artificial Intelligence Governance Frameworks across the European Union, United States, China, and IEEE
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.00868v3
- Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 04:25:45 GMT
- Title: Toward Responsible and Beneficial AI: Comparing Regulatory and Guidance-Based Approaches -A Comprehensive Comparative Analysis of Artificial Intelligence Governance Frameworks across the European Union, United States, China, and IEEE
- Authors: Jian Du,
- Abstract summary: This dissertation presents a comprehensive comparative analysis of artificial intelligence governance frameworks across the European Union, United States, China, and IEEE technical standards.<n>Using a qualitative research design based on systematic content analysis, the study identifies distinctive patterns in regulatory philosophy, implementation mechanisms, and global engagement strategies.
- Score: 2.1631185678683122
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: This dissertation presents a comprehensive comparative analysis of artificial intelligence governance frameworks across the European Union, United States, China, and IEEE technical standards, examining how different jurisdictions and organizations approach the challenge of promoting responsible and beneficial AI development. Using a qualitative research design based on systematic content analysis, the study identifies distinctive patterns in regulatory philosophy, implementation mechanisms, and global engagement strategies across these major AI governance ecosystems.
Related papers
- Understanding AI Trustworthiness: A Scoping Review of AIES & FAccT Articles [41.419459280691605]
Trustworthy AI serves as a foundational pillar for two major AI ethics conferences: AIES and FAccT.<n>This scoping review aims to examine how the AIES and FAccT communities conceptualize, measure, and validate AI trustworthiness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-24T09:40:38Z) - Bottom-Up Perspectives on AI Governance: Insights from User Reviews of AI Products [0.0]
This study adopts a bottom-up approach to explore how governance-relevant themes are expressed in user discourse.<n> Drawing on over 100,000 user reviews of AI products from G2.com, we apply BERTopic to extract latent themes and identify those most semantically related to AI governance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-30T01:33:21Z) - Toward Effective AI Governance: A Review of Principles [2.5411385112104448]
The aim of this study is to identify which frameworks, principles, mechanisms, and stakeholder roles are emphasized in secondary literature on AI governance.<n>The most cited frameworks include the EU AI Act and NIST RMF; transparency and accountability are the most common principles.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-29T13:07:45Z) - Methodological Foundations for AI-Driven Survey Question Generation [41.94295877935867]
This paper presents a methodological framework for using generative AI in educational survey research.<n>We explore how Large Language Models can generate adaptive, context-aware survey questions.<n>We examine ethical issues such as bias, privacy, and transparency.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-02T09:50:34Z) - Towards Adaptive AI Governance: Comparative Insights from the U.S., EU, and Asia [0.0]
This study conducts a comparative analysis of AI trends in the United States (US), the European Union (EU), and Asia.<n>It focuses on three key dimensions: generative AI, ethical oversight, and industrial applications.<n>The US prioritizes market-driven innovation with minimal regulatory constraints, the EU enforces a precautionary risk-based framework emphasizing ethical safeguards, and Asia employs state-guided AI strategies that balance rapid deployment with regulatory oversight.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-01T11:05:47Z) - HH4AI: A methodological Framework for AI Human Rights impact assessment under the EUAI ACT [1.7754875105502606]
The paper highlights AIs transformative nature, driven by autonomy, data, and goal-oriented design.<n>A key challenge is defining and assessing "high-risk" AI systems across industries.<n>It proposes a Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment (FRIA) methodology, a gate-based framework designed to isolate and assess risks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-23T19:10:14Z) - Ethical Implications of AI in Data Collection: Balancing Innovation with Privacy [0.0]
This article examines the ethical and legal implications of artificial intelligence (AI) driven data collection, focusing on developments from 2023 to 2024.<n>It compares regulatory approaches in the European Union, the United States, and China, highlighting the challenges in creating a globally harmonized framework for AI governance.<n>The article emphasizes the need for adaptive governance and international cooperation to address the global nature of AI development.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-17T14:15:59Z) - Media and responsible AI governance: a game-theoretic and LLM analysis [61.132523071109354]
This paper investigates the interplay between AI developers, regulators, users, and the media in fostering trustworthy AI systems.<n>Using evolutionary game theory and large language models (LLMs), we model the strategic interactions among these actors under different regulatory regimes.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-12T21:39:38Z) - Between Innovation and Oversight: A Cross-Regional Study of AI Risk Management Frameworks in the EU, U.S., UK, and China [0.0]
This paper conducts a comparative analysis of AI risk management strategies across the European Union, United States, United Kingdom (UK), and China.<n>The findings show that the EU implements a structured, risk-based framework that prioritizes transparency and conformity assessments.<n>The U.S. uses a decentralized, sector-specific regulations that promote innovation but may lead to fragmented enforcement.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-25T18:52:17Z) - COMPL-AI Framework: A Technical Interpretation and LLM Benchmarking Suite for the EU Artificial Intelligence Act [40.233017376716305]
The EU's Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) is a significant step towards responsible AI development.<n>It lacks clear technical interpretation, making it difficult to assess models' compliance.<n>This work presents COMPL-AI, a comprehensive framework consisting of the first technical interpretation of the Act.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-10T14:23:51Z) - How VADER is your AI? Towards a definition of artificial intelligence systems appropriate for regulation [39.58317527488534]
Recent AI regulation proposals adopt AI definitions affecting ICT techniques, approaches, and systems that are not AI.<n>We propose a framework to score how validated as appropriately-defined for regulation (VADER) an AI definition is.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-07T17:41:15Z) - Levels of AGI for Operationalizing Progress on the Path to AGI [64.59151650272477]
We propose a framework for classifying the capabilities and behavior of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) models and their precursors.
This framework introduces levels of AGI performance, generality, and autonomy, providing a common language to compare models, assess risks, and measure progress along the path to AGI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-04T17:44:58Z) - An interdisciplinary conceptual study of Artificial Intelligence (AI)
for helping benefit-risk assessment practices: Towards a comprehensive
qualification matrix of AI programs and devices (pre-print 2020) [55.41644538483948]
This paper proposes a comprehensive analysis of existing concepts coming from different disciplines tackling the notion of intelligence.
The aim is to identify shared notions or discrepancies to consider for qualifying AI systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-05-07T12:01:31Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.