Regulatory mapping
- EU AI Act references
- NIST AI RMF mappings
- ISO and sector references
Ethotechnics Institute · Open commons
Make high-stakes AI easier to stop, explain, appeal, and repair
When an organization lets software decide who gets a loan, a shift, a benefit, or a refund, it hands over part of its own authority. This site is about keeping that handover reviewable: who authorized this kind of decision, on what evidence, until when, who is allowed to object, and what actually changes when they do.
Start with a live decision, an incident, or a policy gap. Leave with named owners, clocks, evidence, and next actions, using open standards, mechanisms, and diagnostics you can cite.
Other frameworks ask whether you managed risk responsibly. This one asks whether the system can still be stopped while it is harming someone, and whether the people carrying that harm can make it stop. See how it differs → How the method works →
For commercial application of the framework (clinical AI safety evaluation, VC diligence, and governance advisory), see Ethotechnics Studio.
Shared language
Plain definitions and reference data
Definitions for concepts like burden, contestability, repair, and stoppability, with stable links and JSON for audits, tools, and research. Use it when a team needs the same words to mean the same things.
Incident triage
What is going wrong right now?
Choose the closest failure mode. Each path starts with what to do now, then names who should own follow-up and what evidence to collect.
- Decision appealed High · Owner in 24h
- Model made a harmful error Critical · Pause authority needed
- Appeals or reviews are stuck High · Escalate in 4h
- A user was harmed Critical · Human response now
- No owner is assigned High · Assign owner
- Decision cannot be clearly explained Medium · Review evidence
- System cannot be quickly stopped or rolled back Critical · Activate hard halt
Use these when a real person, queue, or decision needs attention—not just documentation.
Audit and compliance
Map practical controls to standards and audits
Standards are written so teams can cite requirements, assign owners, and show evidence without translating abstract principles from scratch.
Audit handoff
- Evidence fields for GRC workflows
- Owners, deadlines, and escalation clocks
- Artifacts for internal or regulator review
Adoption paths
- Policy teams can cite clauses
- Operations teams can rehearse stoppability
- Engineering teams can tie rollback to release gates
How it's different
Existing standards ask: 'Did you manage risk?' Ethotechnics asks: 'Can this system be stopped when it's harming someone?'
Not a replacement for NIST, OECD, or the EU AI Act. The enforcement layer they leave undertreated.
Most AI governance frameworks improve documentation, oversight, and accountability. Ethotechnics addresses what they leave undertreated: whether a running system can actually be halted, reversed, and repaired under stress — on a clock that matters to the person being harmed.
| Existing standard says | Ethotechnics requires |
|---|---|
|
"Maintain human oversight" EU AI Act, Art. 14 |
Named human with stop authority, tested halt path, recovery clock |
|
"Manage risks across the AI lifecycle" NIST AI RMF |
Measurable time-in-harm bounds, exercised rollback and restoration paths |
|
"Conduct conformity assessment" ISO/IEC 42001 |
Evidence that the system can be stopped mid-incident, not just documented as compliant |
|
"Implement responsible AI principles" OECD AI Principles |
Binding escalation: owner + timer + action, or the system degrades |
Ethotechnics treats governability as an operational capability with measurable performance properties — not a compliance posture. See the full standards comparison for the detailed analysis.
Use and cite this work
Free to use with attribution
Ethotechnics Institute materials are published under CC BY 4.0 .
Individual entries and patterns include citation metadata so you can reference exactly what you used.
New and updated
Recent releases
- Evidence Pack Readiness diagnostic — v1.2 (March 2026)
- Glossary: 8 new entries on decision latency and repair authority (February 2026)
- Field note: Mapping invisible maintenance work in clinical AI (January 2026)
Studio
Need hands-on help?
Ethotechnics Studio provides commissioned support for clinical AI safety evaluation, diligence, governance design, and implementation work.