Artificial intelligence is both a subject of this platform's governance work and a tool within it. As a subject, its capabilities, failure modes and deployment conditions define what regulators and standards bodies must address. As a tool, classifiers and language models help code large bodies of policy text and patents, under human review.
What artificial intelligence and machine learning does here.
Artificial intelligence and machine learning develop algorithms that learn patterns from data to classify, predict or generate outputs. They are increasingly used for hazard detection, forecasting and decision support, and are themselves a source of risk. In innovation, artificial intelligence and industry and robotics, machine learning can scale detection and forecasting across interconnected systems. Its own failure modes must be weighed when automated outputs inform consequential decisions. The canonical description is on the STEM Commons.
Coding policy and legal texts
Classifiers and language models tag national AI strategies, regulations and standards by topic, obligation and actor, with a sample double-coded by people and disagreement reported beside the result.
Mapping patents and papers to technologies
Text models link patent families and publications to emerging technology domains, so diffusion and convergence can be traced where classification codes lag behind the field.
Comparing evaluation practice
Benchmarks, red-teaming protocols and model documentation are compared with the requirements of ISO/IEC 42001, the NIST AI RMF and the EU AI Act, showing where practice and obligations align and where they diverge.
03Monitor
Model training.
The screen a team would use to follow this method: its measures, states and decisions. Names are examples and values are illustrative.
Model training
Innovation · AI as subject and tool · Run R-6239
Drift on one sliceGRF · Innovation Nexus
Evaluation by slice
All
0.80
0.02
5478
Pass
Region A
0.86
0.05
1696
Pass
Region B
0.64
0.09
558
Review
Rare class
0.65
0.13
113
Below bar
Method card
Method
Artificial intelligence and machine learning
Split
time-based, no leakage
Features
55
Label
MODELLED
Population stability
Model training: the screen's structure, terms and states for Innovation.Example names and illustrative values; a design, not a record or a live system.
04Data
What the method consumes.
Datasets and records used by artificial intelligence and machine learning on this platform, with the role each plays and the label its values carry. Sources are listed in the source register.
Data
Role
Label
Policy and legal text corpora
Training and test material for text coding
Published statistics
Patent full texts and classifications
Technology mapping and diffusion tracing
Published statistics
Model documentation and safety frameworks
Comparison of developer practice
DECLARED
Benchmark and evaluation results
Capability and risk tracking
REPORTED
Hand-coded validation samples
Reference for classifier accuracy
OBSERVED
05Policy scenarios
Compare instruments: rules, incentives and information.
Three families of instruments side by side against the baseline, each with its own lag and adoption speed, under the coverage and compliance you set; effect sizes are teaching values to replace with evidence. Scenario: named assumptions about the future, not a forecast.
Controls
Baseline trend of the outcome
2.0% a year
Coverage of the instrument
70%
Compliance
75%
Effect size, against the teaching value
100%
Years ahead
20 years
Readouts
Largest reduction at the horizon
Regulation
Its reduction against the baseline
21%
Numbers, methods and sources
Year
Baseline
Regulation
Economic incentive
Information and capacity
0
100.0
99.5
98.8
99.1
1
102.0
101.2
100.1
99.8
2
104.0
102.5
101.1
99.9
3
106.1
103.5
101.6
100.0
4
108.2
103.7
101.8
100.7
5
110.4
103.2
101.7
102.1
6
112.6
102.0
101.6
103.9
7
114.9
100.4
101.6
105.9
8
117.2
99.2
102.1
108.0
9
119.5
98.6
102.9
110.1
10
121.9
98.9
104.2
112.3
11
124.3
99.7
105.7
114.5
12
126.8
101.1
107.4
116.8
13
129.4
102.7
109.4
119.2
14
131.9
104.5
111.4
121.6
15
134.6
106.5
113.5
124.0
16
137.3
108.5
115.7
126.5
17
140.0
110.7
118.0
129.0
18
142.8
112.9
120.4
131.6
19
145.7
115.1
122.8
134.2
20
148.6
117.4
125.2
136.9
Methods
Tools of government Hood (1983), The Tools of Government, Macmillan
Carrots, sticks and sermons Bemelmans-Videc, Rist and Vedung (1998), Transaction
Diffusion of innovations Rogers (2003), Diffusion of Innovations, Free Press
Uncertainty fan (parameter Monte Carlo) Spiegelhalter, Pearson and Short (2011), Visualising uncertainty about the future, Science 333
One-at-a-time sensitivity (tornado) Saltelli and others (2008), Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer, Wiley
Data
The model runs on the teaching values set by the controls. To calibrate it for a place, read it against these admitted layers and series, which this page's map can draw:
Borders Natural Earth
Cities Natural Earth
Compare instruments: rules, incentives and information. Illustrative teaching model: it runs on the values set by the controls, not on measured data. Methods: Tools of government (Hood (1983), The Tools of Government, Macmillan); Carrots, sticks and sermons (Bemelmans-Videc, Rist and Vedung (1998), Transaction); Diffusion of innovations (Rogers (2003), Diffusion of Innovations, Free Press).
Models are evaluated on held-out data that respects spatial, temporal and group structure. Robustness, calibration and fairness are tested alongside accuracy.
Check
How it is done
Human double-coding
A random sample of machine-coded texts is coded independently by two people, and agreement is reported beside every result
Drift and coverage
Classifiers are re-tested when new legal texts or languages enter the corpus, and coverage gaps by language are stated
Error parity
Error rates are compared across jurisdictions, languages and document types before any comparison is published
Performance degrades when deployment conditions differ from training data. Models can encode biases and fail without clear warning on rare events.
07Implementation
From mandate to evaluation, by pillar.
The steps an instrument takes from mandate to evaluation, each with the pillar that runs it, and the decisions that stay with the authority. Teaching model with stated illustrative values, not a prediction.
Mandate and problem framingCompetent authority (outside the programme) A competent authority frames the problem and the mandate under its own rules. Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009)
Evidence and system modelFoundry The system is modelled with its feedbacks, data and stated limits. OECD (2014), principle 2
Options appraised with scenariosFoundry Instruments are compared under scenarios, with uncertainty shown. Hood (1983)
Exercise with stakeholdersUniverse The options are tested in an exercise with those who would implement and bear them. OECD (2014), principle 3
Standard or guidance draftedNexus Standards What works is codified as a standard or guidance, open to comment. Nexus Standards process
Decision by the authorityCompetent authority (outside the programme) The authority decides, outside the programme, with the evidence on record. Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009)
Capacity and trainingRisk Academy Those who implement are trained on the decided instrument and its data. Sendai Framework (2015), priority 2
Monitoring and public reportReports Indicators are published with sources, limits and corrections. OECD (2014), principle 5
Evaluation and revisionNexus Standards Results return to the standard and the model: the cycle closes. Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009)
Methods
Policy cycle Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009), Studying Public Policy, Oxford University Press
Governance of critical risks OECD (2014), Recommendation of the Council on the Governance of Critical Risks
Layered drawing of directed graphs Sugiyama, Tagawa and Toda (1981), IEEE SMC 11
From mandate to evaluation, by pillar: the steps as recorded, each with its pillar; sources as cited on each step.
How AI as subject and tool in innovation governance is governed: instruments, mandates and commitments.
The instruments, mandates, actors and accountability arrangements a policymaker, diplomat or development agency works with, citing the agreements that set them. Structures follow the frameworks named. Any state or progress drawn is illustrative, not a record.
Policy instrument matrix
The kinds of instrument available on AI as subject and tool in innovation governance, by level of government and cooperation.
Instrument type
Local
National
Regional
Global
Regulatory
Zoning, building codes
Laws, standards, licensing
Harmonised rules
Conventions and treaties
Economic
Local levies, grants
Budget lines, taxes, insurance schemes
Risk pools, regional funds
Financing mechanisms
Information
Local warnings
Disclosure, early warning, statistics
Data sharing arrangements
Global monitoring and reporting
Institutional
Local committees
Lead agencies, coordination councils
Regional bodies and secretariats
Multilateral mandates
Cooperative
Community agreements
Partnership compacts
Memoranda and joint programmes
Agreements and joint commitments
A typology after the OECD Recommendation on the Governance of Critical Risks; examples of instrument types, not an inventory of any country's measures.
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction · UNDRRParis Agreement · UNFCCC2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals · United NationsInternational Health Regulations · WHO
What are the limits of artificial intelligence and machine learning in this field?
Performance degrades when deployment conditions differ from training data. Models can encode biases and fail without clear warning on rare events.
How are results checked?
Models are evaluated on held-out data that respects spatial, temporal and group structure. Robustness, calibration and fairness are tested alongside accuracy.
Are the values on this page real?
The data names, roles and checks are real descriptions of practice. The canvas shows a design of the method's use, not a run; no result is reported here.
Reports is the Consortium's quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.
Global Risks ForumInnovation NexusExponential Technology
Never send personal data, sensitive infrastructure detail or anything you have no right to share. A contribution is reviewed before use; sending it confers no authorship or editorial rights, and sponsorship never buys a finding.
Innovation Nexus
Bring a governance question to the Forum.
Information and enquiries are open today. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.
Maps, data and figures on this site are shown for context and general information. They are not advice, forecasts or warnings; the limits of the information are set out in the Disclaimers and Data Notices.
Editors and the expert reviewers named on each article decide what we publish. Funders and partners do not review or approve articles before publication.
This site uses only strictly necessary cookies to work and to remember your privacy choices. Nothing loads from other companies, and we never sell or share your personal information.
Details
This site uses only strictly necessary cookies to work and to remember your privacy choices. Nothing loads from other companies, and we never sell or share your personal information. We run no advertising. You can review your choices at any time through Privacy choices at the foot of every page.