Regulating AI: Lessons from Scientific Computing

Motivated by the perceived importance of explainability to AI regulation, this paper examines the complex relationship between theory, as a proxy for explainability, and computation in scientific practice. Drawing from both historical and contemporary examples of scientific computing, we make three key arguments: First, we show that theory-computation relationships exist in diverse configurations, ranging from theory-foregrounded and theory-backgrounded to more nuanced arrangements where theory is selectively integrated. Second, scientific fields strategically manage the inherent opacity of some computational methods by injecting theory at critical junctures, showing that complete “explainability” is not always a prerequisite for scientific progress or utility. Third, we argue that these lessons from scientific computing have important implications for AI regulation anchored in explainable AI (XAI). We suggest that general approaches to AI oversight should be complemented with a context-specific focus on how theory and computation interact in different domains. Implications for AI regulatory regimes and Information Systems (IS) research are discussed.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
MIS Quarterly
Published
2025-09-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25300/misq/2025/19111
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Regulating AI: Lessons from Scientific Computing

MIS Quarterly
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Regulating AI: Lessons from Scientific Computing

article en

Abstract

Motivated by the perceived importance of explainability to AI regulation, this paper examines the complex relationship between theory, as a proxy for explainability, and computation in scientific practice. Drawing from both historical and contemporary examples of scientific computing, we make three key arguments: First, we show that theory-computation relationships exist in diverse configurations, ranging from theory-foregrounded and theory-backgrounded to more nuanced arrangements where theory is selectively integrated. Second, scientific fields strategically manage the inherent opacity of some computational methods by injecting theory at critical junctures, showing that complete “explainability” is not always a prerequisite for scientific progress or utility. Third, we argue that these lessons from scientific computing have important implications for AI regulation anchored in explainable AI (XAI). We suggest that general approaches to AI oversight should be complemented with a context-specific focus on how theory and computation interact in different domains. Implications for AI regulatory regimes and Information Systems (IS) research are discussed.

MIS Quarterly
European Research Council (BE), Universitat Ramon Llull (ES)
Openalex Percentile: Top 42%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Regulating AI: Lessons from Scientific Computing · MIS Quarterly (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS