AI-Driven Governance Systems for Proactive Regulatory Compliance and Fraud Risk Management in Financial Service Environments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into regulatory compliance frameworks has transformed the financial services sector by enabling more adaptive, predictive, and proactive governance systems. This review examines the current landscape of AI-driven regulatory technologies (RegTech), emphasizing how machine learning, natural language processing, and anomaly detection algorithms are being leveraged to monitor compliance, assess risk, and prevent fraud in real-time. The paper explores the evolution of regulatory requirements, such as Basel III, GDPR, and AML directives, and evaluates how AI tools can streamline compliance reporting and enhance audit readiness. It also assesses the challenges of algorithmic accountability, regulatory uncertainty, data privacy, and explainability in deploying AI for compliance management. Case studies from leading financial institutions and fintech firms illustrate practical applications and emerging best practices. This study concludes by identifying strategic frameworks that integrate AI ethics, legal compliance, and real-time fraud analytics to support resilient and transparent financial ecosystems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it