Direction, evidence grade, and study type are AI-generated labels (gpt-5-mini), not human-verified. Syntheses are LLM-written. "Tensions" are machine-detected candidates, not confirmed contradictions. A research-acceleration tool, not peer review.
How this is built →
1Distinct papers
0Unique collaborators
1/1Semantic Scholar citation coverage
Publication span: 2026. Corpus fetch span: 2026.
Identity provenance
Provider IDs
- Semantic Scholar:
2374964460
ORCID evidence
No valid ORCID is stored.
Observed aliases (1)
- Willem Fourie (semantic scholar, provider refresh)
Topics and outcomes in this view
Assessment themes
- Governance: 1 paper
- Org Design: 1 paper
Claim outcomes
- Governance And Regulation: 1 paper
- Ai Safety And Ethics: 1 paper
Papers in the Semantic Scholar view
Latest stored Semantic Scholar author observations only. Citation counts below are from the same provider and are not combined with other services.
Scroll the table horizontally to see every column.
| Paper | Author evidence | Date | Provider citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| A three-part typology separates moral from legal agency and maps eight possible agent-types for advanced AI — conventional (human moral/legal and corporate legal), contested (various collective agencies), and controversial (individual legal or moral non-human agents) — arguing that recognising legal agency for AI could fill accountability gaps when human attribution fails.arxiv | Willem Fourie provider id |
2026-08-20 | 0 |
Citation observation summary
Semantic Scholar supplied counts for 1 of 1 papers in this view; 0 are missing. The observed paper counts sum to 0 cumulative citations. This is a coverage summary, not an author score or h-index.