{
 "@context": "https://schema.org",
 "@type": "Claim",
 "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/2026-08-08-048",
 "identifier": "kaal:position:2026-08-08-048",
 "additionalType": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/schema.json#AffirmedPositionClaim",
 "name": "Streaming Legal Regulation Of Artificial Intelligence C8Dac61Ac2",
 "text": "Legal Regulation of Artificial Intelligence argues that an AI application should be classified as high risk when it can significantly affect individuals and prohibited when incompatible with fundamental rights. This independently corresponds to Kaal's account of fundamental-rights exposure as the basis for high-risk treatment under the EU AI Act. The abstract proposition is broader than judicial proceedings and does not establish the specific transparency, bias-audit, or human-oversight requirements in Kaal's claim.",
 "author": {
  "@type": "Person",
  "name": "Wulf A. Kaal",
  "identifier": "https://orcid.org/0009-0008-7840-1847"
 },
 "datePublished": "2026-08-08",
 "dateModified": "2026-08-08",
 "creativeWorkStatus": "Affirmed",
 "responseType": "qualification",
 "keywords": [
  "ai-and-agents",
  "systemic-risk",
  "risk-and-incentives",
  "historical-response",
  "scholarly-literature",
  "crossref"
 ],
 "scope_conditions": [
  "The response is limited to the retrieved source proposition and mapped Kaal claim unless fuller source review supports a broader conclusion.",
  "External evidence level: abstract indexed.",
  "Mapping review tier: substantively reviewed abstract-level qualification.",
  "Primary mapping confidence: 0.62.",
  "The primary mapping cleared the automated ambiguity test; substantive scope remains review-bound.",
  "Evidence is limited to an exact proposition in a Crossref-indexed abstract; full text was not reviewed.",
  "No relationship is treated as external endorsement, citation, causation, or validation of a broader Kaal claim.",
  "The source independently uses impact on individuals and incompatibility with fundamental rights as the basis for high-risk classification or prohibition. This corresponds to Kaal's EU AI Act classification mechanism, but the proposition is not confined to judicial proceedings and does not state the transparency, bias-audit, or human-oversight safeguards in Kaal's claim."
 ],
 "currentDebate": {
  "name": "Legal Regulation of Artificial Intelligence",
  "url": "https://doi.org/10.29039/conferencearticle_66c472706831a3.12783599"
 },
 "extends": {
  "identifier": "kaal:claim:5541658-024",
  "url": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5541658-024",
  "citation": "Wulf A. Kaal, Morgan A. Gray, The Evolving Role of Artificial Intelligence in Law (2025). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5541658",
  "paper": "Wulf A. Kaal, Morgan A. Gray, The Evolving Role of Artificial Intelligence in Law",
  "authors": [
   "Wulf A. Kaal"
  ],
  "year": "2025",
  "ssrn": "https://ssrn.com/abstract=5541658",
  "source_pdf_sha256": "e543a2d698fcd522d4d02e034cc9ee1344d0015d2c824b40b9e05ab7c0728c60"
 },
 "isBasedOn": [
  {
   "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5541658-024"
  },
  {
   "@type": "CreativeWork",
   "name": "Legal Regulation of Artificial Intelligence",
   "url": "https://doi.org/10.29039/conferencearticle_66c472706831a3.12783599"
  }
 ],
 "batch_id": "kaal-review:2026-08-08:continuous-crossref-0009-reviewed-v1",
 "review_provenance": "https://kaal-signal-desk.wulf577462.chatgpt.site/#review",
 "publicationStatus": "public",
 "recordTypeNote": "Dated commentary position extending a scholarly corpus claim. Not a verbatim claim extracted from the paper.",
 "isPartOf": {
  "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/index.json"
 },
 "version": "1.0",
 "canonical_url": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/2026-08-08-048",
 "canonicalForm": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/2026-08-08-048.md",
 "candidateId": "kaal:response-draft:2026-08-08:985061e69d82a0c5ec31",
 "evidenceLevel": "abstract indexed",
 "reviewTier": "substantively reviewed abstract-level qualification",
 "mappingConfidence": 0.62,
 "mappingAmbiguous": false,
 "mappingMethod": "complete-corpus source-proposition mechanism and scope adjudication",
 "mappingWhyRelevant": "The source independently uses impact on individuals and incompatibility with fundamental rights as the basis for high-risk classification or prohibition. This corresponds to Kaal's EU AI Act classification mechanism, but the proposition is not confined to judicial proceedings and does not state the transparency, bias-audit, or human-oversight safeguards in Kaal's claim.",
 "sourceProvenance": {
  "source": "crossref",
  "sourceRecordId": "10.29039/conferencearticle_66c472706831a3.12783599",
  "queryId": "concept:a54213db0234",
  "queryText": "dynamic regulation artificial intelligence",
  "canonicalUrl": "https://doi.org/10.29039/conferencearticle_66c472706831a3.12783599",
  "doi": "10.29039/conferencearticle_66c472706831a3.12783599",
  "externalIds": {
   "DOI": "10.29039/conferencearticle_66c472706831a3.12783599",
   "Crossref": "10.29039/conferencearticle_66c472706831a3.12783599"
  },
  "retrievedAt": "2026-08-09T06:09:20.786Z",
  "providerPage": 1,
  "rawObservationSha256": "d1e6264f988492798d1f651e13289e91f9ad71d24ff7d882e3ca7f0dc2204017",
  "inputSnapshotSha256": "130acb1a5a5ce19ca8e5c3a475d60ddb7c61c85f9fe7a60371ef6881f80ff085",
  "inputLine": 4004,
  "chunkId": "crossref-00001",
  "workId": "work:doi:10.29039/conferencearticle_66c472706831a3.12783599",
  "workAuthors": [
   "Vukan Slavković"
  ],
  "workPublishedAt": "2024-08-20",
  "identityKeys": [
   "doi:10.29039/conferencearticle_66c472706831a3.12783599",
   "crossref:10.29039/conferencearticle_66c472706831a3.12783599",
   "url:https://doi.org/10.29039/conferencearticle_66c472706831a3.12783599",
   "title:4eafa7d426487fa6924cf483",
   "proposition:1b895811e45903e44c53c7884184246cbb1fd59b894b43a5d955b7f8201b3e48"
  ],
  "sourceProposition": "The use of AI applications should be categorised as high-risk in instances where there is the potential to significantly affect the lives of individuals and must be prohibited when it is incompatible with fundamental rights.",
  "sourcePropositionSha256": "1a3553af8613a0dcb770f70cc4502f4ae4eedced3e05c43c6f2dac6860170199",
  "sourcePropositionIndex": 1,
  "claimMappings": [
   {
    "claimId": "kaal:claim:5541658-024",
    "claimUrl": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/5541658-024",
    "rank": 1,
    "confidence": 0.62,
    "method": "complete-corpus source-proposition mechanism and scope adjudication",
    "whyRelevant": "The source independently uses impact on individuals and incompatibility with fundamental rights as the basis for high-risk classification or prohibition. This corresponds to Kaal's EU AI Act classification mechanism, but the proposition is not confined to judicial proceedings and does not state the transparency, bias-audit, or human-oversight safeguards in Kaal's claim.",
    "ambiguous": false
   }
  ],
  "substantiveReview": {
   "disposition": "retained",
   "reviewVersion": "kaal-continuous-crossref-substantive-review-v1",
   "reviewedAt": "2026-08-09T06:13:44.631Z",
   "reviewer": "Codex continuous substantive reviewer",
   "rationale": "The source independently uses impact on individuals and incompatibility with fundamental rights as the basis for high-risk classification or prohibition. This corresponds to Kaal's EU AI Act classification mechanism, but the proposition is not confined to judicial proceedings and does not state the transparency, bias-audit, or human-oversight safeguards in Kaal's claim.",
   "limitations": [
    "Evidence is limited to an exact proposition in a Crossref-indexed abstract; full text was not reviewed.",
    "No relationship is treated as external endorsement, citation, causation, or validation of a broader Kaal claim.",
    "The source independently uses impact on individuals and incompatibility with fundamental rights as the basis for high-risk classification or prohibition. This corresponds to Kaal's EU AI Act classification mechanism, but the proposition is not confined to judicial proceedings and does not state the transparency, bias-audit, or human-oversight safeguards in Kaal's claim."
   ],
   "sourceIdentity": {
    "status": "verified",
    "source": "Crossref REST work record",
    "doi": "10.29039/conferencearticle_66c472706831a3.12783599",
    "title": "Legal Regulation of Artificial Intelligence",
    "authors": [
     "Vukan Slavković"
    ],
    "language": null,
    "publisher": "Publishing Center RIOR",
    "checkedAt": "2026-08-09T06:13:44.631Z",
    "responseBodySha256": "b025198af709b5cc3a11c49001b62778527317eee37b24393d5c8ed4fd3c5d5d",
    "providerReceipt": {
     "path": "outputs/historical-backfill-2026-08-08-crossref/raw-receipts/crossref-009-00001.json",
     "sha256": "04c93d9e1d368d4bdf7931b441e6ca8b0e2c4c673644d2fbe23d95672eea62e3",
     "byteLength": 2159683
    }
   },
   "independentRationale": "The exact proposition is present in the live Crossref abstract and the deposited reference list contains no Kaal-authored reference; the relationship is limited to the independently stated proposition.",
   "nonOverlap": {
    "candidateIdMatches": 0,
    "canonicalUrlMatches": 0,
    "propositionHashMatches": 0
   }
  }
 },
 "userAffirmation": "Automatically authorized under standing authority receipt kaal-standing-publication-authorization:2026-08-01:hourly-reviewed-batches, SHA-256 e2126054b58bb4e88db65c334ef4fc8ae78dcaadc63543c408133c4eefceb9b1, limited to this substantively reviewed batch and the unchanged 5,033 scholarly claims.",
 "sha256": "db29bfceefd1bea1df89164788ac703b52c9334b2f397c2d63667533a46a583e"
}