US
United States
cmp
41
frame distribution · 101% observed
dominant frame
Consumer and public safetytop requirements
- Risk Assessment
- Transparency Disclosure
- Human Oversight
PROJECT BABEL
Measuring how five governments differ on what they require of AI — and why they say those rules are necessary.
LLM-analyzed from official government sources
how to read the scores
hover for detail
each score compares one country to the average of the other four above
the six reasons
why it says what it says
jurisdiction cards
histogram scale 0–38 · shared
US
United States
cmp
41
frame distribution · 101% observed
dominant frame
Consumer and public safetytop requirements
EU
European Union
cmp
63
frame distribution · 99% observed
dominant frame
Fundamental rightstop requirements
KR
South Korea
cmp
20
frame distribution · 101% observed
dominant frame
Fundamental rightstop requirements
JP
Japan
cmp
70
frame distribution · 100% observed
dominant frame
Innovation enablementtop requirements
CN
China
cmp
80
frame distribution · 100% observed
dominant frame
Social stabilitytop requirements
pairwise_divergence · per country
how far each jurisdiction sits from every other · sorted
US
United States
distance to peers
farthest
CN · 74
closest
KR · 15
EU
European Union
distance to peers
farthest
CN · 88
closest
KR · 12
KR
South Korea
distance to peers
farthest
CN · 55
closest
EU · 12
JP
Japan
distance to peers
farthest
CN · 86
closest
US · 48
CN
China
distance to peers
farthest
EU · 88
closest
KR · 55
latest_sources
20 of 30 · newest first
Technical Contributions to AI Governance | NIST
US·Regulatory guidance·INV
Roadmap for the NIST Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) | NIST
US·Standards guideline·SAF
NIST AI RMF Playbook
US·Standards guideline·SAF
Crosswalks to the NIST Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) | NIST
US·Standards guideline·SAF
AI Standards | NIST
US·Standards guideline·INV
AI Risk Management Framework FAQs | NIST
US·Standards guideline·SAF
AI Risk Management Framework - Engage | NIST
US·Standards guideline·SAF
AI Congressional Mandates, Executive Orders and Actions | NIST
US·Regulatory guidance·ECO
고영향 인공지능 사업자 책무 가이드라인
KR·Regulatory guidance·RGT
인공지능 투명성 확보 가이드라인
KR·Regulatory guidance·SOC
인공지능 안전성 확보 가이드라인(안)
KR·Regulatory guidance·SAF
인공지능 영향평가 가이드라인
KR·Regulatory guidance·RGT
コンテンツ制作のための生成AI利活用ガイドブック
JP·Regulatory guidance·RGT
AI Guidelines for Business Ver 1.0 (Provisional Translation)
JP·Regulatory guidance·RGT
AI・データの利用に関する契約ガイドライン 1.1版(全体版)
JP·Regulatory guidance·INV
AIの利用・開発に関する契約チェックリスト
JP·Standards guideline·SAF
初等中等教育段階における生成AIの利活用に関するガイドライン
JP·Regulatory guidance·INV
医療デジタルデータのAI研究開発等への利活用に係るガイドライン
JP·Regulatory guidance·ECO
AI戦略 2022
JP·Strategy paper·ECO
人工知能技術戦略実行計画
JP·Strategy paper·ECO