Systems· 2026Q2
The Semantic Structure of AI Governance: A Computational Analysis of Cross-Jurisdictional AI Policy Documents
- 0citations
- Q2SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
Computational analysis of 36 AI policy documents reveals that semantic relationships among jurisdictions are highly sensitive to data representation choices, with no stable multi-cluster governance typology found.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- AI governance semantic structure is highly sensitive to analytical specifications, particularly data representation choices.
- No stable multi-cluster governance typology was identified across jurisdictions.
- Within-model perturbations showed high concordance (Spearman ρ = 0.995), but data preprocessing like grand mean centering reduced agreement significantly (ρ = 0.570).
- A positive association was observed between blinded co-author similarity ratings and embedding similarity (ρ = 0.696).
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
This methodological study examines the semantic structure of AI governance within a purposive, repository-bounded corpus of 36 official policy documents aggregated into 32 jurisdictional cases. The corpus is treated as an audited analytical repository rather than as a systematic or population-representative sample. We combine multilingual sentence embeddings with document selection and segmentation sensitivity analyses, cluster tendency diagnostics, corrected language Freedman–Lane MRQAP, graph construction sensitivity, and blinded co-author calibration. Within the same transformer model, removing the 31-token overlap while retaining complete source token coverage produced little change in pair ordering (Spearman ρ = 0.995). However, grand mean centering reduced agreement with the raw baseline to ρ = 0.570, and agreement with a sentence-preserving character LSA representation was ρ = 0.473. The observed relative geometry is therefore highly concordant under some within-model perturbations but materially dependent on common direction removal and representation family. Under the primary one standard error rule, gap statistics selected k = 1 across all nine full-case representations. The tested procedures therefore provide no support for a stable multi-cluster governance typology. The primary country-level regional analysis excluded the European Union and yielded a positive within-minus-between similarity difference of 0.0444 under 50,000 node label permutations (one-sided and two-sided plus-one p = 0.00002). Network topology and community structure varied substantially across graph constructions, while blinded co-author similarity ratings showed a positive descriptive association with embedding similarity (ρ = 0.696). Overall, the findings support comparative conclusions about semantic relationships among the audited cases and about their sensitivity to the tested analytical specifications. The results do not establish unusual policy homogeneity, causal diffusion, implementation effects, or a unique governance network.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Systems, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: General Social Sciences
General Social SciencesSocial Sciences