Researcher profile

Marcos López de Prado

Marcos López de Prado contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

A Framework for Responsible AI Systems: Building Societal Trust through Domain Definition, Trustworthy AI Design, Auditability, Accountability, and Governance

Responsible Artificial Intelligence (RAI) addresses the ethical and regulatory challenges of deploying AI systems in high-risk scenarios. This paper proposes a comprehensive framework for the design of an RAI system (RAIS) that integrates five key dimensions: domain definition, trustworthy AI design, auditability, accountability, and governance. Unlike prior work that treats these components in isolation, our proposal emphasizes their inter-dependencies and iterative feedback loops, enabling proactive and reactive accountability throughout the AI lifecycle. Beyond presenting the framework, we synthesize recent developments in global AI governance and analyze limitations in existing principles-based approaches, highlighting fragmentation, implementation gaps, and the need for participatory governance. The paper also identifies critical challenges and research directions for the RAIS framework, including sector-specific adaptation and operationalization, to support certification, post-deployment monitoring, and risk-based auditing. By bridging technical design and institutional responsibility, this work offers a practical blueprint for embedding responsibility throughout the AI lifecycle, enabling transparent, ethically aligned, and legally compliant AI-based systems.

preprint2026arXiv

Aligning Trustworthy AI with Democracy: A Dual Taxonomy of Opportunities and Risks

Artificial Intelligence (AI) poses both significant risks and valuable opportunities for democratic governance. This paper introduces a dual taxonomy to evaluate AI's complex relationship with democracy: the AI Risks to Democracy (AIRD) taxonomy, which identifies how AI can undermine core democratic principles such as autonomy, fairness, and trust; and the AI's Positive Contributions to Democracy (AIPD) taxonomy, which highlights AI's potential to enhance transparency, participation, efficiency, and evidence-based policymaking. Grounded in the European Union's approach to ethical AI governance, and particularly the seven Trustworthy AI requirements proposed by the European Commission's High-Level Expert Group on AI, each identified risk is aligned with mitigation strategies based on EU regulatory and normative frameworks. Our analysis underscores the transversal importance of transparency and societal well-being across all risk categories and offers a structured lens for aligning AI systems with democratic values. By integrating democratic theory with practical governance tools, this paper offers a normative and actionable framework to guide research, regulation, and institutional design to support trustworthy, democratic AI. It provides scholars with a conceptual foundation to evaluate the democratic implications of AI, equips policymakers with structured criteria for ethical oversight, and helps technologists align system design with democratic principles. In doing so, it bridges the gap between ethical aspirations and operational realities, laying the groundwork for more inclusive, accountable, and resilient democratic systems in the algorithmic age.