From Protocols to Evidence: Bounded Claims for AI in Service of the Common Good
Paper proposes a rupture test and RISE AI architecture for evidence-bounded responsible-AI claims, framed via EU AI Act and NIST AI RMF.
The paper argues AI deployment intervenes in pre-existing institutional failures of responsiveness, belonging, care, and accountability, and must therefore evaluate both the system and the institutional rupture it enters. It reviews how the EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, and ISO/IEC 42001 translate principles into protocols, and draws on Pope Leo XIV's Magnifica Humanitas to develop a rupture test linking institutional baselines to system evaluation. It distinguishes evidence-bounded deployment from measurement-bounded governance and introduces RISE AI, an architecture for bounded claims about Responsibility, Inclusivity, Safety, and Empowerment.
- Argues AI deployment is an intervention in pre-existing institutional failures, not only a governance problem.
- Reviews how EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, and ISO/IEC 42001 translate principles into protocols.
- Proposes a rupture test linking institutional baselines to system evaluation.
- Distinguishes evidence-bounded deployment from measurement-bounded governance; RISE AI targets Responsibility, Inclusivity, Safety, Empowerment.
Full article203 words · extracted from arxiv.org · click to collapse
Artificial Intelligence does more than create a governance problem. It can also reveal where institutions have already failed to provide responsiveness, belonging, care, and accountability. Once deployed, AI becomes an intervention in those conditions. It can repair, compound, substitute for, or conceal the failures it encounters. Responsible AI must therefore evaluate both the system and the institutional rupture into which it is introduced. The move from principles to protocols is already underway. The EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, and assurance practices translate commitments into roles, requirements, records, oversight, and assessment. The harder questions are what these protocols actually establish, whose power they leave untouched, and where measurement must stop. Pope Leo XIV's Magnifica Humanitas provides a broader moral frame centered on dignity, technological power, and the common good. Drawing on that frame, we develop a rupture test that links institutional baselines to system evaluation. We distinguish evidence-bounded deployment, which limits claims to what has actually been evaluated, from measurement-bounded governance, which records constraints that favorable evidence cannot override. Within those limits, RISE AI provides an architecture for making bounded, evidence-based claims about Responsibility, Inclusivity, Safety, and Empowerment. Responsible AI requires better engineering, institutional repair, and continued moral and political judgment.
Text extracted automatically; images, tables and formatting may be missing. Original: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.11910