The first large-scale empirical study of AI governance policies in OSS is presented, identifying 385 projects that adopted AI policies and derive TRACE, a framework capturing five governance dimensions: Transparency, Responsibility, Attribution, Constraints, and Enforcement.
Abstract
Generative AI is rapidly reshaping Open Source Software (OSS) software development,prompting projects to introduce policies governing AI-assisted contributions. However, little is known about how these policies differ or whether they influence developer experience. We present the first large-scale empirical study of AI governance policies in OSS. Analyzing 29,624 GitHub repositories, we identify 385 projects that adopted AI policies and derive TRACE, a framework capturing five governance dimensions: Transparency, Responsibility, Attribution, Constraints, and Enforcement. We further classify policies into five governance families and estimate their effects using propensity-score matching and longitudinal difference-in-differences analysis. Our results show that AI governance primarily regulates rather than prohibits AI-assisted development. Policy adoption brings maintainer engagement, increased AI disclosure, richer review interactions, and improved code quality while AI-assisted contributions continue to grow. Governance design matters: policies emphasizing transparency and responsibility produced stronger community and quality outcomes than restrictive approaches alone. Our findings show how different AI governance strategies shape developer experience and provide evidence to help OSS communities design effective AI policies.
The AI Contribution Governance Framework is introduced, which organizes recurring concerns and governance mechanisms across projects and helps OSS communities develop AI contribution policies and provides researchers with a vocabulary for studying how AI is changing collaborative software production.
This work analyzes 281 AI contribution policies and identifies ten countermeasures against AI slop, targeting pull requests, users, and autonomous agents, to give maintainers and researchers a baseline and a labeled corpus for studying the impact of AI policies.
André C. Hora, Romain Robbes, Stefano Zacchiroli· 1 citation
The paper presents a ten-principle governance model, a risk-tiering structure, an agent-identity control baseline, and a four-phase implementation roadmap, concluding that prohibition-based strategies are largely ineffective and that visibility, safe enablement, and embedded controls produce more durable risk reduction...
Abhipray Mirke, Sushmita Dey Banik· International journal of com...· 0 citations
This work exposes the limits of disclosure rules and provenance records as responses to AI-mediated collaboration and offers three directions for discussion: distinguishing the roles AI plays, identifying judgments that require clear human ownership, and creating conditions in which AI involvement can be disclosed with...
A human-centered mitigation framework that treats information quality and the equitable distribution of verification labor as shared institutional responsibilities is contributed — advancing sustainable, ethical, and future-oriented information management in the generative AI era.
Blenda G. Mutuma· Communications of the IIMA· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.