"We Permit the Use of AI, but [...]": The Landscape of AI Policies in Popular Open Source Projects

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.07542v1
• Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2026 14:25:25 GMT
• Title: "We Permit the Use of AI, but [...]": The Landscape of AI Policies in Popular Open Source Projects
• Abstract summary: Open source communities are converging on a new governance artifact: the AI contribution policy.<n>We analyzed 281 AI contribution policies, and manually classified them along the six dimensions.<n>Half of the dedicated AI policy files have already been revised since creation.
• Score: 5.469767315515344
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Open source communities are converging on a new governance artifact: the AI contribution policy. These policies barely existed a few months ago and are now being written and adopted. We analyzed 281 AI contribution policies, and manually classified them along the six dimensions; to study how policies change, we also tracked 92 dedicated AI policy files over time. We answer four research questions on (1) AI usage allowance, (2) AI disclosure practices, (3) AI slop countermeasures, and (4) AI policy evolution. We find that, first, permission is the norm rather than the exception: 83.3% of policies permit or encourage AI in code contributions. But permission comes with conditions, as 67.3% require a high level of human involvement and 43.4% assign accountability. Second, AI disclosure is required by 48.8% of policies, most often in pull request descriptions and commit messages, but what must be disclosed varies widely. Third, we identify ten countermeasures against AI slop, targeting pull requests, users, and autonomous agents. Finally, policies are not static: half of the dedicated AI policy files have already been revised since creation. Our results give maintainers and researchers a baseline and a labeled corpus for studying the impact of AI policies.

Related papers

• Making AI Visible, Not Vanished: How AI Policies Reshape Developer Experience on GitHub [11.19606367764924]
  We present the first large-scale empirical study of AI governance policies in Open Source Software (OSS)<n>We identify 385 projects that adopted AI policies and derive TRACE, a framework capturing five governance dimensions.<n>Our results show that AI governance primarily regulates rather than prohibits AI-assisted development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-04T08:39:07Z)
• AI Policy, Disclosure, and Human in the Loop: How Are Contribution Guidelines Adapting to GenAI? [2.3625700564650347]
  Generative AI (GenAI) has transformed software development.<n>To address the rise of GenAI, open source projects have begun implementing policies for AI usage in contributions.<n>This paper provides an initial empirical study to explore how open source projects are adapting to GenAI contributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-15T23:44:08Z)
• Academic journals' AI policies fail to curb the surge in AI-assisted academic writing [0.6800474505694646]
  We analyze 5,114 journals and over 5.2 million papers to evaluate the real-world impact of AI usage guidelines.<n>We show that despite 70% of journals adopting AI policies, researchers' use of AI writing tools has increased dramatically across disciplines.<n>Our findings suggest that current policies have largely failed to promote transparency or restrain AI adoption.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-07T07:30:53Z)
• Lost in Translation: Policymakers are not really listening to Citizen Concerns about AI [0.0]
  Governments are inviting public comment on AI, but as they translate input into policy, much of what citizens say is lost.<n>This paper compares three countries, Australia, Colombia, and the United States, that invited citizens to comment on AI risks and policies.<n>In each nation, fewer than one percent of the population participated.<n>Officials showed limited responsiveness to the feedback they received, failing to create an effective feedback loop.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-23T13:57:02Z)
• "We are not Future-ready": Understanding AI Privacy Risks and Existing Mitigation Strategies from the Perspective of AI Developers in Europe [56.1653658714305]
  We interviewed 25 AI developers based in Europe to understand which privacy threats they believe pose the greatest risk to users, developers, and businesses.<n>We find that there is little consensus among AI developers on the relative ranking of privacy risks.<n>While AI developers are aware of proposed mitigation strategies for addressing these risks, they reported minimal real-world adoption.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-01T13:51:33Z)
• Advancing Science- and Evidence-based AI Policy [163.43609502905707]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-02T23:20:58Z)
• Beware! The AI Act Can Also Apply to Your AI Research Practices [2.532202013576547]
  The EU has become one of the vanguards in regulating the digital age.<n>The AI Act specifies -- due to a risk-based approach -- various obligations for providers of AI systems.<n>This position paper argues that, indeed, the AI Act's obligations could apply in many more cases than the AI community is aware of.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-03T08:01:36Z)
• Who is Responsible When AI Fails? Mapping Causes, Entities, and Consequences of AI Privacy and Ethical Incidents [31.53910982726317]
  We analyzed 202 real-world AI privacy and ethical incidents to develop a taxonomy.<n>Our findings reveal widespread harms from poor organizational decisions and legal non-compliance.<n>Our findings provide actionable guidance for policymakers and practitioners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-28T21:57:38Z)
• Almost AI, Almost Human: The Challenge of Detecting AI-Polished Writing [55.2480439325792]
  This study systematically evaluations twelve state-of-the-art AI-text detectors using our AI-Polished-Text Evaluation dataset.<n>Our findings reveal that detectors frequently flag even minimally polished text as AI-generated, struggle to differentiate between degrees of AI involvement, and exhibit biases against older and smaller models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T18:45:37Z)
• 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)
• Consent in Crisis: The Rapid Decline of the AI Data Commons [74.68176012363253]
  General-purpose artificial intelligence (AI) systems are built on massive swathes of public web data. We conduct the first, large-scale, longitudinal audit of the consent protocols for the web domains underlying AI training corpora.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T16:50:18Z)
• Particip-AI: A Democratic Surveying Framework for Anticipating Future AI Use Cases, Harms and Benefits [54.648819983899614]
  General purpose AI seems to have lowered the barriers for the public to use AI and harness its power. We introduce PARTICIP-AI, a framework for laypeople to speculate and assess AI use cases and their impacts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-21T19:12:37Z)
• Ten Hard Problems in Artificial Intelligence We Must Get Right [72.99597122935903]
  We explore the AI2050 "hard problems" that block the promise of AI and cause AI risks. For each problem, we outline the area, identify significant recent work, and suggest ways forward.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-06T23:16:41Z)

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.