When Is Self-Disclosure Optimal? Incentives and Governance of AI-Generated Content

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.18654v1
• Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 16:31:04 GMT
• Title: When Is Self-Disclosure Optimal? Incentives and Governance of AI-Generated Content
• Authors: Juan Wu, Zhe, Zhang, Amit Mehra,
• Abstract summary: Gen-AI is reshaping content creation on digital platforms by reducing production costs and enabling scalable output of varying quality.<n> platforms have begun adopting disclosure policies that require creators to label AI-generated content.<n>This paper develops a formal model to study the economic implications of such disclosure regimes.
• Score: 25.691139058468377
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Generative artificial intelligence (Gen-AI) is reshaping content creation on digital platforms by reducing production costs and enabling scalable output of varying quality. In response, platforms have begun adopting disclosure policies that require creators to label AI-generated content, often supported by imperfect detection and penalties for non-compliance. This paper develops a formal model to study the economic implications of such disclosure regimes. We compare a non-disclosure benchmark, in which the platform alone detects AI usage, with a mandatory self-disclosure regime in which creators strategically choose whether to disclose or conceal AI use under imperfect enforcement. The model incorporates heterogeneous creators, viewer discounting of AI-labeled content, trust penalties following detected non-disclosure, and endogenous enforcement. The analysis shows that disclosure is optimal only when both the value of AI-generated content and its cost-saving advantage are intermediate. As AI capability improves, the platform's optimal enforcement strategy evolves from strict deterrence to partial screening and eventual deregulation. While disclosure reliably increases transparency, it reduces aggregate creator surplus and can suppress high-quality AI content when AI is technologically advanced. Overall, the results characterize disclosure as a strategic governance instrument whose effectiveness depends on technological maturity and trust frictions.

Related papers

• How to Disclose? Strategic AI Disclosure in Crowdfunding [10.090562206470329]
  We find that mandatory AI disclosure significantly reduces crowdfunding performance.<n>Funds raised decline by 39.8% and backer counts by 23.9% for AI-involved projects.<n>This adverse effect is systematically moderated by disclosure strategy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-17T16:26:03Z)
• When Life Gives You AI, Will You Turn It Into A Market for Lemons? Understanding How Information Asymmetries About AI System Capabilities Affect Market Outcomes and Adoption [45.10829096284761]
  Complex AI systems can appear highly accurate while making costly errors or embedding hidden defects.<n>This paper provides the first experimental evidence on the role of information asymmetries and disclosure designs in shaping user adoption of AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-29T12:49:28Z)
• Can Media Act as a Soft Regulator of Safe AI Development? A Game Theoretical Analysis [57.68073583427415]
  We study whether media coverage has the potential to push AI creators into the production of safe products.<n>Our results reveal that media is indeed able to foster cooperation between creators and users, but not always.<n>By shaping public perception and holding developers accountable, media emerges as a powerful soft regulator.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-02T12:13:34Z)
• Rethinking Data Protection in the (Generative) Artificial Intelligence Era [138.07763415496288]
  We propose a four-level taxonomy that captures the diverse protection needs arising in modern (generative) AI models and systems.<n>Our framework offers a structured understanding of the trade-offs between data utility and control, spanning the entire AI pipeline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-03T02:45:51Z)
• Ethical AI: Towards Defining a Collective Evaluation Framework [0.3413711585591077]
  Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming sectors such as healthcare, finance, and autonomous systems.<n>Yet its rapid integration raises urgent ethical concerns related to data ownership, privacy, and systemic bias.<n>This article proposes a modular ethical assessment framework built on ontological blocks of meaning-discrete, interpretable units.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T21:10:47Z)
• Targeted Unlearning with Single Layer Unlearning Gradient [15.374381635334897]
  Machine unlearning methods aim to remove sensitive or unwanted content from trained models.<n>We propose Single Layer Unlearning Gradient computation (SLUG) as an efficient method to unlearn targeted information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T15:52:36Z)
• Generative AI for Secure and Privacy-Preserving Mobile Crowdsensing [74.58071278710896]
  generative AI has attracted much attention from both academic and industrial fields. Secure and privacy-preserving mobile crowdsensing (SPPMCS) has been widely applied in data collection/ acquirement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-17T04:00:58Z)
• Coordinated Flaw Disclosure for AI: Beyond Security Vulnerabilities [1.3225694028747144]
  We propose a Coordinated Flaw Disclosure framework tailored to the complexities of machine learning (ML) issues. Our framework introduces innovations such as extended model cards, dynamic scope expansion, an independent adjudication panel, and an automated verification process. We argue that CFD could significantly enhance public trust in AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-10T20:39:04Z)
• VerifAI: Verified Generative AI [22.14231506649365]
  Generative AI has made significant strides, yet concerns about its accuracy and reliability continue to grow. We propose that verifying the outputs of generative AI from a data management perspective is an emerging issue for generative AI. Our vision is to promote the development of verifiable generative AI and contribute to a more trustworthy and responsible use of AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-06T06:11:51Z)
• 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)
• Trustworthy AI [75.99046162669997]
  Brittleness to minor adversarial changes in the input data, ability to explain the decisions, address the bias in their training data, are some of the most prominent limitations. We propose the tutorial on Trustworthy AI to address six critical issues in enhancing user and public trust in AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-02T20:04:18Z)

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.