Advancing Science- and Evidence-based AI Policy

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.02748v1
• Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2025 23:20:58 GMT
• Title: Advancing Science- and Evidence-based AI Policy
• Authors: Rishi Bommasani, Sanjeev Arora, Jennifer Chayes, Yejin Choi, Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar, Li Fei-Fei, Daniel E. Ho, Dan Jurafsky, Sanmi Koyejo, Hima Lakkaraju, Arvind Narayanan, Alondra Nelson, Emma Pierson, Joelle Pineau, Scott Singer, Gaël Varoquaux, Suresh Venkatasubramanian, Ion Stoica, Percy Liang, Dawn Song,
• Abstract summary: This paper tackles the problem of how to optimize the relationship between evidence and policy to address the opportunities and challenges of AI.<n>An increasing number of efforts address this problem by often either (i) contributing research into the risks of AI and their effective mitigation or (ii) advocating for policy to address these risks.
• Score: 163.43609502905707
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: AI policy should advance AI innovation by ensuring that its potential benefits are responsibly realized and widely shared. To achieve this, AI policymaking should place a premium on evidence: Scientific understanding and systematic analysis should inform policy, and policy should accelerate evidence generation. But policy outcomes reflect institutional constraints, political dynamics, electoral pressures, stakeholder interests, media environment, economic considerations, cultural contexts, and leadership perspectives. Adding to this complexity is the reality that the broad reach of AI may mean that evidence and policy are misaligned: Although some evidence and policy squarely address AI, much more partially intersects with AI. Well-designed policy should integrate evidence that reflects scientific understanding rather than hype. An increasing number of efforts address this problem by often either (i) contributing research into the risks of AI and their effective mitigation or (ii) advocating for policy to address these risks. This paper tackles the hard problem of how to optimize the relationship between evidence and policy to address the opportunities and challenges of increasingly powerful AI.

Related papers

• The California Report on Frontier AI Policy [110.35302787349856]
  Continued progress in frontier AI carries the potential for profound advances in scientific discovery, economic productivity, and broader social well-being.<n>As the epicenter of global AI innovation, California has a unique opportunity to continue supporting developments in frontier AI.<n>Report derives policy principles that can inform how California approaches the use, assessment, and governance of frontier AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-17T23:33:21Z)
• Must Read: A Systematic Survey of Computational Persuasion [60.83151988635103]
  AI-driven persuasion can be leveraged for beneficial applications, but also poses threats through manipulation and unethical influence.<n>Our survey outlines future research directions to enhance the safety, fairness, and effectiveness of AI-powered persuasion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-12T17:26:31Z)
• Pitfalls of Evidence-Based AI Policy [13.370321579091387]
  We argue that if the goal is evidence-based AI policy, the first regulatory objective must be to actively facilitate the process of identifying, studying, and deliberating about AI risks.<n>We discuss a set of 15 regulatory goals to facilitate this and show that Brazil, Canada, China, the EU, South Korea, the UK, and the USA all have substantial opportunities to adopt further evidence-seeking policies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-13T18:59:30Z)
• Assessing the State of AI Policy [0.5156484100374057]
  This work provides an overview of AI legislation and directives at the international, U.S. state, city and federal levels. It also reviews relevant business standards, and technical society initiatives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-31T16:09:25Z)
• The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy making [1.5156317247732694]
  Generative artificial intelligence has the potential to both exacerbate and ameliorate existing socioeconomic inequalities. Our goal is to highlight how generative AI could worsen existing inequalities while illuminating how AI may help mitigate pervasive social problems. In the information domain, generative AI can democratize content creation and access, but may dramatically expand the production and proliferation of misinformation. In education, it offers personalized learning, but may widen the digital divide. In healthcare, it might improve diagnostics and accessibility, but could deepen pre-existing inequalities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-16T10:37:22Z)
• Fairness in AI and Its Long-Term Implications on Society [68.8204255655161]
  We take a closer look at AI fairness and analyze how lack of AI fairness can lead to deepening of biases over time. We discuss how biased models can lead to more negative real-world outcomes for certain groups. If the issues persist, they could be reinforced by interactions with other risks and have severe implications on society in the form of social unrest.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-16T11:22:59Z)
• Aligning Artificial Intelligence with Humans through Public Policy [0.0]
  This essay outlines research on AI that learn structures in policy data that can be leveraged for downstream tasks. We believe this represents the "comprehension" phase of AI and policy, but leveraging policy as a key source of human values to align AI requires "understanding" policy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-25T21:31:14Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)
• AI Federalism: Shaping AI Policy within States in Germany [0.0]
  Recent AI governance research has focused heavily on the analysis of strategy papers and ethics guidelines for AI published by national governments and international bodies. Subnational institutions have also published documents on Artificial Intelligence, yet these have been largely absent from policy analyses. This is surprising because AI is connected to many policy areas, such as economic or research policy, where the competences are already distributed between the national and subnational level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-28T16:06:07Z)
• Building a Foundation for Data-Driven, Interpretable, and Robust Policy Design using the AI Economist [67.08543240320756]
  We show that the AI Economist framework enables effective, flexible, and interpretable policy design using two-level reinforcement learning and data-driven simulations. We find that log-linear policies trained using RL significantly improve social welfare, based on both public health and economic outcomes, compared to past outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-06T01:30:41Z)

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.