Search Results (9)

The rapid integration of generative artificial intelligence into scientific publishing is reshaping how academic text can be produced, revised, and scaled. While transparent and limited use of AI for language support may be acceptable, a new structural vulnerability may be emerging in medical publishing: the large-scale production of short, plausible, and weakly individualized correspondence across multiple specialties. In this viewpoint, we describe and conceptualize a pattern that may be termed synthetic authorship, defined not as undisclosed AI use alone, but as a reproducible mode of scholarly output structurally facilitated by automation. We focus particularly on letters to the editor, a format that combines brevity, rapid editorial handling, and formal indexation, and may therefore be especially exposed to this phenomenon. Based on recurring patterns observed in PubMed-indexed literature, including unusually high publication velocity, abrupt thematic dispersion, and stylistic uniformity across unrelated domains, we argue that such outputs may challenge the authenticity, epistemic value, and editorial function of scientific correspondence. We do not present empirical proof of misconduct, but rather outline a conceptual framework for understanding this emerging risk and propose proportionate editorial safeguards, including cross-domain pattern detection and contextual assessment of authorship coherence. As AI lowers the threshold for generating domain-plausible commentary at scale, scientific publishing must adapt its integrity frameworks accordingly. In this context, vigilance toward synthetic authorship may become an essential component of editorial responsibility and post-publication quality control. Full article

UK ports handle the vast majority of national trade by volume and constitute Critical National Infrastructure. Since 2004, the SOLAS/ISPS Code and the Port Security Regulations 2009 have established baseline security requirements, recently supplemented by the National Security and Investment Act 2021 and the National Security Act 2023, creating overlapping obligations. This contribution maps the evolving regulatory framework (ISPS/Port Security Regulations, NSI 2021, NSA 2023, and CNI-related guidance). It assesses operational impacts using industry metrics and draws comparative lessons from Singapore and Rotterdam. Empirical research indicates that security regulation is not uniformly detrimental to performance: targeted, intelligence-led, and technology-enabled measures can coincide with productivity gains, whereas fragmented or blanket compliance regimes are more consistently associated with increased dwell times and throughput loss. These delays propagate through supply chains and intensify cost pressures, with proportionally greater impacts on mid-sized ports. Comparative evidence indicates that risk-based screening, integrated cyber–physical platforms, transparent governance, and clear cost-sharing frameworks can maintain security without compromising commercial performance. The contribution recommends (i) tiered, risk-based screening with transparent indicators; (ii) the consolidation of overlapping regulatory obligations; (iii) clearer liability frameworks, including model terms and alternative dispute resolution; and (iv) scheduled review provisions to maintain proportionality over time. Full article

Artificial intelligence is already being used in the administration of Justice, with various applications assisting judges in resolving cases. In particular, in criminal Justice, these applications include predictive Justice and decision-making assistance through the assessment of facts, as well as the classification of criminals into risk groups. This article examines the current regulatory and ethical framework (AI Act, Council of Europe Convention on AI, CEPEJ Ethical Charter, UNESCO and OECD principles) and develops a regulatory approach to the use of AI systems by judges and prosecutors. The methodology is based on a doctrinal analysis of international, EU, and professional ethical literature, as well as on a synthesis of principles of judicial conduct (Bangalore Principles, Magna Carta of Judges). To strike a balance between the rules of governing system use and judicial ethics, the article proposes a consistent framework of ethical principles (legitimacy, transparency, accountability, integrity, human oversight, prohibition of discrimination) and introduces a practical “line of reasoning” with key questions that judges should consider before and during the use of intelligent tools (risks, bias, proportionality, understanding of the algorithm, and impact on judicial judgment). The article concludes that AI may improve the efficiency of the justice system only when included inside a strong ethical framework and specialized training, guaranteeing that final judicial decisions remain solely human and fully aligned with the rule of law. Full article

Consumer exposure to chemicals in the EU is currently assessed separately for different products without aggregating exposure from different sources. A more integrated ap proach represents a promising opportunity to improve comprehensive risk evaluation and transparency across the value chain. This study develops aggregate consumer expo sure and risk assessment methods that involve calculation of exposure and risk for each pathway using the risk characterization ratio (RCR) as a uniform risk metric. Aggregate risk is obtained by adding up pathway-specific RCRs. The developed methodology re presents a new approach by evaluating exposure of seven population groups via all path ways and by using key input values normalized to body weight to reflect population-specific differences. The study demonstrates the practical applicability of the methodol o gy by assessing consumer exposure to the antioxidant ethylene bis[3,3-bis(3-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyphenyl)butyrate] (Hostanox^® O 3), resulting from its use in food and drinking water contact materials, textiles and sealants. This case study demonstrates aggregate RCRs well below one for all groups. The highest aggregate RCRs are found for infants and toddlers, reflecting their proportionally higher food consumption and skin surface area. The methodology is transparent and can easily be applied to other substances, e.g., by industry stakeholders and authorities, if the substance concentration in products can be established. This study may inform further development of aggregate exposure and risk methods in EU regulatory frameworks. Full article

Explainability in deep learning (XDL) for healthcare is increasingly portrayed as essential for addressing the “black box” problem in clinical artificial intelligence. However, this universal transparency mandate may create unintended consequences, including cognitive overload, spurious confidence, and workflow disruption. This paper examines a fundamental question: Is explainability a panacea that resolves AI’s trust deficit, or a Pandora’s box that introduces new risks? Drawing on general systems theory we demonstrate that the answer is profoundly context dependent. Through systemic analysis of current XDL methods, Saliency Maps, LIME, SHAP, and attention mechanisms, we reveal systematic disconnects between technical transparency and clinical utility. This paper argues that XDL is a context-dependent systemic property rather than a universal requirement. It functions as a panacea when proportionately applied to high-stakes reasoning tasks (cancer treatment planning, complex diagnosis) within integrated socio-technical architectures. Conversely, it becomes a Pandora’s box when superficially imposed on routine operational functions (scheduling, preprocessing) or time-critical emergencies (e.g., cardiac arrest) where comprehensive explanation delays lifesaving intervention. The paper proposes a risk-stratified framework recognizing that a specific subset of healthcare AI applications—those involving high-stakes clinical reasoning—require comprehensive explainability, while other applications benefit from calibrated transparency appropriate to their clinical context. We conclude that explainability is neither a cure-all nor an inevitable harm, but rather a dynamic equilibrium requiring continuous rebalancing across technical, cognitive, and organizational dimensions. Full article

Data-driven marketing analytics has advanced targeting and optimization, yet its underlying infrastructure now functions as a complex sociotechnical system with overlooked ecological costs. This study conceptualizes programmatic advertising through a systems lens. It introduces the Ecological Delivery Paradox, a structural incongruity where environmentally friendly advertising messages are transmitted via energy-intensive delivery pipelines. Using an interpretivist–abductive design, we conducted 38 in-depth interviews with consumers and professionals, which were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis in MAXQDA. Results show that awareness of hidden delivery costs emerges through a concretization threshold and crystallizes into metaphors such as “clean message, dirty conduit,” which trigger differentiated cognitive–affective pathways. These pathways shape trust trajectories across four profiles: cliff erosion, slow seep, suspended risk, and resilient cores. System-level moderators, including rationalization buffers, efficiency beliefs, and the visibility of low-data alternatives, determine outcomes. The findings extend marketing systems theory by reframing greenwashing as message–infrastructure misalignment and by integrating delivery congruence into advertising trust models. We propose a data-driven control architecture that aligns predictive analytics with ecological proportionality through mechanisms such as lightweight creatives, carbon-aware bidding coefficients, frequency–data quotas, and ad-level transparency labels. This systemic approach advances legitimacy, audience trust, and sustainability as joint objectives in programmatic advertising. Full article

This study examines how the Norwegian Child Welfare Tribunal justifies regulating telephone and digital communication between children in public care and their parents. The regulation of such contact represents a distinct form of state interference in family life and must adhere to principles of necessity, proportionality, and respect for children’s rights. Using a thematic analysis of 34 Tribunal decisions involving 44 children, the study identifies four central themes: ensuring stability and emotional security, addressing parental behavior, balancing proportionality and necessity, and considering the child’s view. The Tribunal’s reasoning often reflects a cautious, preventive approach, prioritizing emotional stability. However, the lack of transparent assessments of necessity and inconsistent inclusion of children’s perspectives raises concerns about proportionality and children’s autonomy. Additionally, the limited involvement of children in these decisions risks making restrictions difficult to implement in practice, as children may not understand or agree with them and instead seek unregulated contact. The findings underline the need for clearer justifications and more consistent consideration of a child’s view to ensure that decisions align with their best interests and remain feasible in practice. Full article

Proportionality, pivotal to EU regulations and Solvency II, tailors rules to insurers’ size and complexity. Inconsistent application by supervisory authorities (NSAs) necessitates clarity to prevent undue costs. This study examines the issue via a review of the literature and industry discussions, emphasizing Solvency II’s introduction of proportionality and the varied interpretations it evokes. Transparent communication is crucial, and regulatory evolution must align with market dynamics, with the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) fostering convergence. Assessing proportionality mandates a comprehensive evaluation of an insurer’s nature, scale, and complexity. Regulatory distinctions between first-party and third-party risks could enhance market efficiency. Ultimately, a holistic, market-oriented approach is essential for proportionate regulation in the insurance sector, requiring concerted efforts to elucidate frameworks, foster transparency, and align regulatory evolution with market dynamics. Full article

The COVID-19 pandemic has evidenced the chronic inequality that exists between populations and communities as regards global healthcare. Vaccination, an appropriate tool for the prevention of infection, should be guaranteed by means of proportionate interventions to defeat such inequality in populations and communities affected by a higher risk of infection. Equitable criteria of justice should be identified and applied with respect to access to vaccination and to the order in which it should be administered. This article analyzes, as regards the worldwide distribution of anti-COVID-19 vaccines, the various ways the principle of equity has been construed and applied or even overlooked. The main obstacle to equal access to vaccines is vaccine nationalism. The perception of equity varies with the differing reference values adopted. Adequate response to needs appears to be the principal rule for achieving the criterion of equity in line with distributive justice. Priorities must be set equitably based on rational parameters in accordance with current needs. The entire process must be governed by transparency, from parameter identification to implementation. The issue of equal access to vaccination affects the entire world population, necessitating specific protective interventions. In light of this, the World Health Organization (WHO) has devised the COVAX plan to ensure that even the poorest nations of the world receive the vaccine; certain initiatives are also supported by the European Union (EU). This pandemic has brought to the fore the need to build a culture of equitable relationships both in each country’s own domain and with the rest of the world. Full article