Institutions for the Post-Scarcity of Judgment

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.22966v1
• Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2026 19:18:16 GMT
• Title: Institutions for the Post-Scarcity of Judgment
• Abstract summary: Each major technological revolution inverts a particular scarcity and rebuilds institutions around the shift.<n>The near-consensus diagnosis of the AI revolution holds that AI collapses the cost of prediction while judgment remains scarce.<n>This Opinion argues the inversion has now flipped: competent-looking judgment is produced at scale and at marginal cost approaching zero.
• Score: 0.4626793375563363
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Each major technological revolution inverts a particular scarcity and rebuilds institutions around the shift. The near-consensus diagnosis of the AI revolution holds that AI collapses the cost of prediction while judgment remains scarce. This Opinion argues the inversion has now flipped: competent-looking judgment (selecting, ranking, attributing, certifying) is produced at scale and at marginal cost approaching zero, and four complements become scarce: verified signal, legitimacy, authentic provenance, and integration capacity (the community's tolerance for delegated cognition). Because judgment is the substance of institutions, the institutions built to manufacture legitimate judgment (courts, journals, licensing bodies, legislatures) now compete with the technology for the same functional role. The piece traces the pattern across scientific institutions, professional licensing, intellectual property, democratic legitimacy, and foundation-model concentration, and closes with a three-move agenda: reframe AI policy as institutional redesign, build provenance and verification as commons, and develop the formal apparatus for institutional composition under strategic agents.

Related papers

• Authenticity Debt and the Synthetic Content Threat Landscape: A Layered Framework for Trust, Provenance, and IP Governance in the Generative AI Era [2.113921717639734]
  Generative artificial intelligence has fundamentally changed how content is produced.<n>This paper presents a comprehensive, multi-dimensional taxonomy of generative AI harms and attack vectors.<n>We argue that no single mechanism is sufficient in open, adversarial, and evolving environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-30T08:51:55Z)
• Provably Secure Agent Guardrail [89.79561918065122]
  Existing defense architectures rely on empirical semantic guardrails and probabilistic large model adjudicators.<n>This paper proposes a new security paradigm for agents based on the fundamental limitations of logical reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-28T02:12:41Z)
• AI-Augmented Science and the New Institutional Scarcities [0.4626793375563363]
  Competent-looking judgment, including selecting, ranking, attributing, and certifying, is now produced at scale at marginal cost approaching zero.<n>This inverts the dominant economics-of-AI reading that treats judgment as the scarce complement to cheap prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-04T13:16:08Z)
• When Agents Evolve, Institutions Follow [52.359340707289114]
  We argue that multi-agent systems built on large language models face the same challenge.<n>Their central problem is not only individual intelligence, but collective organization.<n>We translate seven historical political institutions, spanning four canonical governance patterns, into executable multi-agent architectures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-30T10:30:58Z)
• Governed Reasoning for Institutional AI [0.0]
  Cognitive Core is a governed decision substrate built from nine typed cognitive primitives.<n>Human review is a condition of execution rather than a post-hoc check.<n>We benchmark three systems on an 11-case balanced prior authorization appeal evaluation set.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-12T14:09:18Z)
• Stability of AI Governance Systems: A Coupled Dynamics Model of Public Trust and Social Disruptions [0.49157446832511503]
  This paper proposes a rigorous coupled dynamics model that integrates a discrete-time Hawkes process.<n>A key innovation is the bidirectional feedback mechanism: declining trust amplifies the intensity of subsequent controversy events.<n> Numerical experiments reveal how echo chamber network structures and media amplification accelerate governance failure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-10T12:24:30Z)
• The Compulsory Imaginary: AGI and Corporate Authority [0.0]
  The paper argues that the two leading AGI firms construct sociotechnical imaginaries through a structurally consistent rhetorical strategy.<n>The paper extends the sociotechnical imaginaries framework from nation-states to private firms at the frontier of transformative technology development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T05:04:44Z)
• The Digital Gorilla: Rebalancing Power in the Age of AI [0.0]
  Article offers a conceptual foundation for AI governance by treating such systems as a fourth societal actor.<n>It develops a Four Societal Actors framework that maps how power flows among these actors across five power modalities.<n>It advances a federalized, polycentric governance architecture and institutionalizes dynamic checks and balances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T17:46:54Z)
• Making LLMs Reliable When It Matters Most: A Five-Layer Architecture for High-Stakes Decisions [51.56484100374058]
  Current large language models (LLMs) excel in verifiable domains where outputs can be checked before action but prove less reliable for high-stakes strategic decisions with uncertain outcomes.<n>This gap, driven by mutually cognitive biases in both humans and artificial intelligence (AI) systems, threatens the defensibility of valuations and sustainability of investments in the sector.<n>This report describes a framework emerging from systematic qualitative assessment across 7 frontier-grade LLMs and 3 market-facing venture vignettes under time pressure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-10T22:24:21Z)
• Democracy-in-Silico: Institutional Design as Alignment in AI-Governed Polities [2.1485350418225244]
  Democracy-in-Silico is an agent-based simulation where societies of advanced AI agents govern themselves under different institutional frameworks.<n>We explore what it means to be human in an age of AI by tasking Large Language Models (LLMs) to embody agents with traumatic memories, hidden agendas, and psychological triggers.<n>We present a novel metric, the Power-Preservation Index (PPI), to quantify misaligned behavior where agents prioritize their own power over public welfare.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-27T04:44:41Z)
• Never Compromise to Vulnerabilities: A Comprehensive Survey on AI Governance [211.5823259429128]
  We propose a comprehensive framework integrating technical and societal dimensions, structured around three interconnected pillars: Intrinsic Security, Derivative Security, and Social Ethics.<n>We identify three core challenges: (1) the generalization gap, where defenses fail against evolving threats; (2) inadequate evaluation protocols that overlook real-world risks; and (3) fragmented regulations leading to inconsistent oversight.<n>Our framework offers actionable guidance for researchers, engineers, and policymakers to develop AI systems that are not only robust and secure but also ethically aligned and publicly trustworthy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T09:42:56Z)
• Resource Rational Contractualism Should Guide AI Alignment [69.07915246220985]
  Contractualist alignment proposes grounding decisions in agreements that diverse stakeholders would endorse.<n>We propose Resource-Rationalism: a framework where AI systems approximate the agreements rational parties would form.<n>An RRC-aligned agent would not only operate efficiently, but also be equipped to dynamically adapt to and interpret the ever-changing human social world.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-20T18:57:13Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• 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)

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.