Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Policy

aiqbench analysis

This paper addresses the critical shift required in governing autonomous AI systems, arguing that traditional reactive oversight models are insufficient due to distributed control within the supply chain. It proposes transforming regulatory frameworks from passive compliance mechanisms into active governance structures capable of managing systemic risks generated by agentic behaviors. By analyzing current regimes like the EU AI Act and UK financial services rules, it outlines a path toward proactive adaptation in legal and policy landscapes for advanced AI deployment.
Sources coveringarXiv, LessWrong, SiliconANGLE, InfoQ
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Regulating autonomous and agentic AI

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2607.21345v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Regulating activities where regulatees use autonomous and agentic AI is challenging. Regulatory assumptions about regulatee knowledge and control no longer hold true; much of that lies elsewhere in the AI supply chain which thus needs to be brought within the scope of regulation. Governance systems for autonomous AI cannot replicate existing governance models, but need a fresh approach. Retrospective supervisory oversight becomes ineffective as a risk management tool, and AI autonomy generates new systemic risks which require new solutions. This paper investigate four regulatory systems: UK regulation of content platforms, data protection, UK financial services, and the EU AI Act\'92s cross-sectoral regime. It analyses the challenges posed by autonomous and agentic AI and proposes potential solutions which regulators might adopt. These will transform regulation from a reactive process to an active one, and assist it in adapting to the challenges of AI autonomy.

Abstract:Regulating activities where regulatees use autonomous and agentic AI is challenging. Regulatory assumptions about regulatee knowledge and control no longer hold true; much of that lies elsewhere in the AI supply chain which thus needs to be brought within the scope of regulation. Governance systems for autonomous AI cannot replicate existing governance models, but need a fresh approach. Retrospective supervisory oversight becomes ineffective as a risk management tool, and AI autonomy generates new systemic risks which require new solutions. This paper investigate four regulatory systems: UK regulation of content platforms, data protection, UK financial services, and the EU AI Act\'92s cross-sectoral regime. It analyses the challenges posed by autonomous and agentic AI and proposes potential solutions which regulators might adopt. These will transform regulation from a reactive process to an active one, and assist it in adapting to the challenges of AI autonomy.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2607.21345 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2607.21345v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.21345 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 237 words

Related coverage