ArticlePloS one2026
Quantitative evaluation of China's artificial intelligence policies: A PMC index-based modeling approach.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI), various countries have introduced policies to address the social, economic, and ethical challenges brought by technological advancements. This study systematically evaluates the effectiveness of China's AI policies based on the Policy Model Consistency (PMC) method and conducts a comparative analysis with policies from developed countries in Europe and the United States. By constructing a multi-dimensional quantitative assessment system that encompasses indicators such as policy types, timeliness, content, fields, evaluation, tools, and effectiveness levels, this study fills a gap in the existing research on quantitative evaluation. Text mining and high-frequency word analysis revealed the core themes and focus areas of the policies, laying the groundwork for subsequent quantitative analysis. The study finds that China's AI policies have achieved significant results in promoting technological innovation, industrial development, and social transformation; however, shortcomings remain in legal protection, ethical regulation, cross-domain collaboration, and sustainable development issues. Further cross-national comparisons indicate that there are differences between China and developed countries in Europe and the United States in terms of AI policy design and implementation, particularly regarding the application of policy tools and the driving forces behind international collaboration. Based on the empirical analysis results using the PMC index model, this study proposes targeted policy optimization suggestions aimed at enhancing policy execution and adaptability. This study not only provides an innovative framework for the quantitative evaluation of AI policies but also offers theoretical support for the collaborative development of global AI policies.
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.