The AI Evaluability Gap: The Missing Layer for Managing Risk and Sustaining Value
Organizations deploying AI face two fundamental governance challenges: managing AI risk and sustaining AI value. Both depend on evidence whose sufficiency cannot be taken for granted. We call the shared underlying challenge the AI Evaluability Gap: the condition in which organizations lack sufficient evidence to support high-confidence governance decisions regarding either risk or value. We argue that this gap reflects a category error in current practice. Existing governance approaches focus primarily on properties of systems, such as safety, fairness, reliability, compliance, and value, while paying comparatively little attention to the evidentiary foundations required to justify decisions about those properties. We further argue that AI governance encompasses both operational decisions regarding whether a system may operate and investment decisions regarding whether it merits continued organizational resources. To address this problem, we introduce Evaluability, defined as the capability of a system to generate, maintain, and renew evidence sufficient to support high-confidence governance decisions over time. We formalize governance decisions as functions of calibrated confidence Conf(D|E) and identify six properties of evaluable evidence: observability, attributability, intervenability, verifiability, calibration, and temporal validity. The framework distinguishes Operational Certification, which relies primarily on structural evidence to justify deployment decisions, from Investment Certification, which relies primarily on causal evidence to justify continued resource allocation. We argue that evidence sufficiency is a missing layer of AI governance and that closing the AI Evaluability Gap is a prerequisite for both managing risk and sustaining value in AI-enabled organizations.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Aggregating Incomplete Rankings
This study considers the method to derive a ranking of alternatives by aggregating the rankings submitted by several individuals who may not evaluate all of them. The collection of subsets of alternatives that individual…
A Corpus of eRulemaking User Comments for Measuring Evaluability of Arguments
Vibe Compiler: A Research-Logic Synthesis Tool That Runs without Prompt Engineering -Toward Enhancing Metacognition for Sustaining Agency in the Age of Generative AI-
Used as a capable servant, generative AI has greatly accelerated intellectual work, yet it also risks eroding human epistemic agency by encouraging uncritical acceptance of AI-generated reasoning. Preserving that agency …
Prompt EngineeringScale-Sensitive Shattering: Learnability and Evaluability at Optimal Scale
We study the optimal scale at which real-valued function classes exhibit uniform convergence and learnability. Our main result establishes a scale-sensitive generalization of the fundamental theorem of PAC learning: for …
When Readability and Source Retention Diverge: An Evaluability Gap in AI Translation
Readable AI output can leave an evaluability gap: even when the source is shown, an overall-quality judgment may not reflect what an output preserves. We investigated how source-text condition and output rendering relate…