AIApr 13

AI Integrity: A New Paradigm for Verifiable AI Governance

arXiv:2604.1106550.12 citationsh-index: 2
Predicted impact top 70% in AI · last 90 daysOriginality Incremental advance
AI Analysis

For AI governance researchers and policymakers, this provides a new procedural approach to ensure transparency and auditability in high-stakes AI decisions, though it remains a conceptual framework without empirical validation.

The paper introduces AI Integrity, a procedural governance paradigm that verifies the reasoning process of AI systems rather than evaluating outcomes, and defines the Authority Stack model with four layers (Normative, Epistemic, Source, Data) to detect corruption and bias. It proposes the PRISM framework with six metrics for operational measurement.

AI systems increasingly shape high-stakes decisions in healthcare, law, defense, and education, yet existing governance paradigms -- AI Ethics, AI Safety, and AI Alignment -- share a common limitation: they evaluate outcomes rather than verifying the reasoning process itself. This paper introduces AI Integrity, a concept defined as a state in which the Authority Stack of an AI system -- its layered hierarchy of values, epistemological standards, source preferences, and data selection criteria -- is protected from corruption, contamination, manipulation, and bias, and maintained in a verifiable manner. We distinguish AI Integrity from the three existing paradigms, define the Authority Stack as a 4-layer cascade model (Normative, Epistemic, Source, and Data Authority) grounded in established academic frameworks -- Schwartz Basic Human Values for normative authority, Walton argumentation schemes with GRADE/CEBM hierarchies for epistemic authority, and Source Credibility Theory for source authority -- characterize the distinction between legitimate cascading and Authority Pollution, and identify Integrity Hallucination as the central measurable threat to value consistency. We further specify the PRISM (Profile-based Reasoning Integrity Stack Measurement) framework as the operational methodology, defining six core metrics and a phased research roadmap. Unlike normative frameworks that prescribe which values are correct, AI Integrity is a procedural concept: it requires that the path from evidence to conclusion be transparent and auditable, regardless of which values a system holds.

Foundations

The foundational work for this paper's niche, ranked by how specifically the neighbourhood builds on it — not by global fame.

Your Notes