ReviewFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025
Artificial intelligence, complexity, and systemic resilience in global governance.
Review in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The HALO Model: A Learning Health System Framework for Artificial Intelligence.Learning health systems · 2026Article
- Beyond regulation: why Europe must lead AI stewardship in health.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- An overview of CRISPR-artificial intelligence theranostics: Current and emerging applications.Biomaterials translational · 2026Review
- Data quality challenges of AIGC application in smart agriculture.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping international governance, presenting opportunities to enhance systemic resilience while posing significant ethical, social, and geopolitical challenges. This paper argues that complexity science offers a valuable framework for navigating AI's integration into global governance systems. We analyze AI's dual capacity as both a transformative tool for improving decision-making, resource allocation, and crisis management, and as a disruptive force introducing risks like data bias, exacerbated inequalities, and governance gaps. By framing resilience as a crucial, boundary concept bridging disciplines and practice, we advocate for adaptive, inclusive governance models capable of managing the inherent uncertainties of AI-driven complex socio-technical systems. Integrating complexity insights with principles like institutional modularity and robust stakeholder collaboration is vital for fostering equity, accountability, and sustainability. This study proposes a conceptual approach aiming to align technological innovation with societal values, ensuring AI deployment contributes to a more resilient and equitable global future, while at the same time it proposes complexity as a boundary concept to bridge the gap between governance literature and philosophy of science and technology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.