This article demonstrates the need to address framing risk in AI governance, indicating a critical blind spot in institutions.
AI governance has concentrated on execution risk: whether agents act lawfully, whether decisions are compliant, whether liability can be assigned. This focus leaves a structural blind spot. Before execution, there is representation. Large language models shape how option spaces are framed at the moment reliance forms. They influence what appears comparable, credible, or even visible. When that representational layer is external, non-deterministic, and unlogged, institutions face a new condition: evidentiary asymmetry. Influence persists. Durable record does not. This article argues that governance must expand from agent control to framing reconstructability. The emerging requirement is not optimization of outputs, but preservation of decision-adjacent representational states sufficient for supervisory review.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tim de Rosen (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: