arXiv:2603.20248cs.CYcs.AI2026-03

构建信任与社会扰动耦合模型,揭示治理系统稳定性的深层结构机制

Stability of AI Governance Systems: A Coupled Dynamics Model of Public Trust and Social Disruptions

  • 用意见动态与事件触发过程耦合建模信任演化
  • 发现高信任系统可能结构脆弱,低信任环境反而稳定
  • 适合关注AI治理风险、制度韧性研究的学者

AI系统日益嵌入公共治理,但现有研究缺乏判断公众对算法机构信任偏离是否收敛或演变为崩溃的正式工具。稳定性指在固定结构参数下对有限状态扰动的渐近恢复能力。本文提出一种将Friedkin-Johnsen意见动态与受Hawkes启发的争议强度过程耦合的数学框架。基于‘计算机是社会行动者’理论及大语言模型信任研究,双向耦合表明:治理稳定性取决于信息环境的结构架构,而非绝对信任水平。我们推导出精确的谱稳定性准则,明确区分韧性与崩溃,揭示事件自激发与记忆持久性系统性缩小稳定参数范围。结构分析得出四个反直觉结论:高信任系统可能结构脆弱,低信任环境可具结构性稳定,动态稳定性既不衡量也不保证算法公平性或正当性,网络拓扑虽重塑均衡异质性,但其对谱稳定性的影响在显式记忆主导区间被统一限制。因此,治理评估应将对危害与公平的规范评价,与可恢复性的结构分析并列,而非互为代理。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

AI systems are increasingly entrenched in public governance, yet scholarship lacks formal tools to determine when deviations of public trust in algorithmic institutions dissipate and when they grow into collapse. Stability refers here to asymptotic recovery from finite state perturbations under fixed structural parameters. We address this gap by developing a mathematical framework for institutional trust stability that couples a Friedkin-Johnsen opinion dynamics process with a Hawkes-inspired intensity process for AI controversies. Motivated by the Computers-Are-Social-Actors literature and recent studies of trust in large language models, this bidirectional coupling reveals that governance stability depends on the structural architecture of the information environment rather than absolute trust levels. We derive an exact spectral stability criterion delineating resilience from collapse, demonstrating how event self-excitation and memory persistence systematically narrow the stable parameter regime. Our structural analysis yields four counterintuitive structural implications: high-trust systems can be structurally fragile, low-trust environments can be structurally stable, dynamical stability neither measures nor guarantees algorithmic fairness or legitimacy, and network topology reshapes equilibrium heterogeneity while its effect on spectral stability is uniformly bounded in an explicit memory-dominated regime. Governance assessment should therefore pair normative evaluation of harms and fairness with structural analysis of recoverability, rather than treating either as a proxy for the other.

AI治理信任模型系统稳定性社会影响

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。