Institutional AI Sovereignty Through Gateway Architecture: Implementation Report from Fontys ICT

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.08978v1
• Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2025 12:41:32 GMT
• Title: Institutional AI Sovereignty Through Gateway Architecture: Implementation Report from Fontys ICT
• Abstract summary: To counter fragmented, high-risk adoption of commercial AI tools, we built and ran an institutional AI platform in a six-month, 300-user pilot.<n>Our solution is a governed gateway platform with three layers: a gateway core enforcing policy, controlling access and budgets, and routing traffic to EU infrastructure by default.<n>The pilot ran reliably with no privacy incidents and strong adoption, enabling EU-default routing, managed spending, and transparent model choices.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: To counter fragmented, high-risk adoption of commercial AI tools, we built and ran an institutional AI platform in a six-month, 300-user pilot, showing that a university of applied sciences can offer advanced AI with fair access, transparent risks, controlled costs, and alignment with European law. Commercial AI subscriptions create unequal access and compliance risks through opaque processing and non-EU hosting, yet banning them is neither realistic nor useful. Institutions need a way to provide powerful AI in a sovereign, accountable form. Our solution is a governed gateway platform with three layers: a ChatGPT-style frontend linked to institutional identity that makes model choice explicit; a gateway core enforcing policy, controlling access and budgets, and routing traffic to EU infrastructure by default; and a provider layer wrapping commercial and open-source models in institutional model cards that consolidate vendor documentation into one governance interface. The pilot ran reliably with no privacy incidents and strong adoption, enabling EU-default routing, managed spending, and transparent model choices. Only the gateway pattern combines model diversity and rapid innovation with institutional control. The central insight: AI is not a support function but strategy, demanding dedicated leadership. Sustainable operation requires governance beyond traditional boundaries. We recommend establishing a formal AI Officer role combining technical literacy, governance authority, and educational responsibility. Without it, AI decisions stay ad-hoc and institutional exposure grows. With it, higher-education institutions can realistically operate their own multi-provider AI platform, provided they govern AI as seriously as they teach it.

Related papers

• Traccia: An OpenTelemetry-Based Governance Platform for AI Systems [0.7919969809015938]
  The rapid development of Large Language Models (LLMs) and Artificial Intelligent (AI) powered autonomous agents has fundamentally changed the existing forms of software governance.<n>Current solutions fail to protect unbound state space agentic architecture from serious threats such as alignment, security concerns, and unauthorized deployment of shadow AI systems.<n>A solution is proposed for overcoming the discussed challenges in form of a coherent multi-level AI governance stack Traccia built on the top of OpenTelemetry infrastructure platform.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-15T19:14:21Z)
• The AI Resilience Gap: Bringing Artificial Intelligence Inside the Operational Resilience Perimeter [0.0]
  We argue that AI adoption creates a resilience obligation distinct from, and inadequately covered by, the trustworthy AI stack.<n>We propose the AI Resilience Framework: a regime-agnostic method for bringing AI dependencies inside the operational resilience perimeter.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-08T12:54:11Z)
• AI Governance under Political Turnover: The Alignment Surface of Compliance Design [0.0]
  Governments are increasingly interested in using AI to make administrative decisions cheaper, more scalable, and more consistent.<n>But for AI to be incorporated into public administration it must be embedded in a compliance layer that makes decisions reviewable, repeatable, and legally defensible.<n>We develop a formal model in which institutions choose the scale of automation, the degree of codification, and safeguards on iterative use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-22T21:42:50Z)
• A Moral Agency Framework for Legitimate Integration of AI in Bureaucracies [0.0]
  Public-sector bureaucracies seek to reap the benefits of artificial intelligence (AI)<n>We present a three-point Moral Agency Framework for legitimate integration of AI in bureaucratic structures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-11T17:49:19Z)
• Development of management systems using artificial intelligence systems and machine learning methods for boards of directors (preprint, unofficial translation) [0.0]
  The study addresses the paradigm shift in corporate management, where AI is moving from a decision support tool to an autonomous decision-maker.<n>A central problem identified is that the development of AI technologies is far outpacing the creation of adequate legal and ethical guidelines.<n>The research proposes a "reference model" for the development and implementation of autonomous AI systems in corporate management.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-05T04:01:22Z)
• Generative AI for Autonomous Driving: Frontiers and Opportunities [145.6465312554513]
  This survey delivers a comprehensive synthesis of the emerging role of GenAI across the autonomous driving stack.<n>We begin by distilling the principles and trade-offs of modern generative modeling, encompassing VAEs, GANs, Diffusion Models, and Large Language Models.<n>We categorize practical applications, such as synthetic data generalization, end-to-end driving strategies, high-fidelity digital twin systems, smart transportation networks, and cross-domain transfer to embodied AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-13T17:59:20Z)
• Artificial Intelligence in Government: Why People Feel They Lose Control [44.99833362998488]
  The use of Artificial Intelligence in public administration is expanding rapidly.<n>While AI promises greater efficiency and responsiveness, its integration into government functions raises concerns about fairness, transparency, and accountability.<n>This article applies principal-agent theory to AI adoption as a special case of delegation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-02T07:46:41Z)
• Position: Mind the Gap-the Growing Disconnect Between Established Vulnerability Disclosure and AI Security [56.219994752894294]
  We argue that adapting existing processes for AI security reporting is doomed to fail due to fundamental shortcomings for the distinctive characteristics of AI systems.<n>Based on our proposal to address these shortcomings, we discuss an approach to AI security reporting and how the new AI paradigm, AI agents, will further reinforce the need for specialized AI security incident reporting advancements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-19T13:50:26Z)
• Using AI Alignment Theory to understand the potential pitfalls of regulatory frameworks [55.2480439325792]
  This paper critically examines the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) Uses insights from Alignment Theory (AT) research, which focuses on the potential pitfalls of technical alignment in Artificial Intelligence. As we apply these concepts to the EU AI Act, we uncover potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement in the regulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T17:38:38Z)
• Do Responsible AI Artifacts Advance Stakeholder Goals? Four Key Barriers Perceived by Legal and Civil Stakeholders [59.17981603969404]
  The responsible AI (RAI) community has introduced numerous processes and artifacts to facilitate transparency and support the governance of AI systems. We conduct semi-structured interviews with 19 government, legal, and civil society stakeholders who inform policy and advocacy around responsible AI efforts. We organize these beliefs into four barriers that help explain how RAI artifacts may (inadvertently) reconfigure power relations across civil society, government, and industry.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-22T00:14:37Z)
• 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)
• Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress [171.05448842016125]
  We describe risks that include large-scale social harms, malicious uses, and irreversible loss of human control over autonomous AI systems. There is a lack of consensus about how exactly such risks arise, and how to manage them. Present governance initiatives lack the mechanisms and institutions to prevent misuse and recklessness, and barely address autonomous systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T17:59:06Z)
• Oversight for Frontier AI through a Know-Your-Customer Scheme for Compute Providers [0.8547032097715571]
  Know-Your-Customer (KYC) is a standard developed by the banking sector to identify and verify client identity. KYC could provide a mechanism for greater public oversight of frontier AI development and close loopholes in existing export controls. Unlike the strategy of limiting access to AI chip purchases, regulating the digital access to compute offers more precise controls.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T16:17:29Z)
• Structured access to AI capabilities: an emerging paradigm for safe AI deployment [0.0]
  Instead of openly disseminating AI systems, developers facilitate controlled, arm's length interactions with their AI systems. Aim is to prevent dangerous AI capabilities from being widely accessible, whilst preserving access to AI capabilities that can be used safely.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-13T19:30:16Z)
• Trustworthy AI: From Principles to Practices [44.67324097900778]
  Many current AI systems were found vulnerable to imperceptible attacks, biased against underrepresented groups, lacking in user privacy protection, etc. In this review, we strive to provide AI practitioners a comprehensive guide towards building trustworthy AI systems. To unify the current fragmented approaches towards trustworthy AI, we propose a systematic approach that considers the entire lifecycle of AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-04T03:20:39Z)

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.