AI going rogue? An integrative narrative review of the tacit assumptions underlying existential AI-risks

Abstract This paper presents an integrative narrative review of the tacit background assumptions underlying AI existential risk (X-risks) futures. Once confined to science fiction, concerns about AI X-risks now shape debates at the crossroads of the tech world, NGOs, politics and (social) media. Despite growing attention, the plausibility of AI surpassing human controllability remains highly contested. Examining 81 peer-reviewed papers from Scopus and Web of Science, we find a fragmented discourse characterized by bold yet often unsubstantiated claims, including accelerationist growth models and speculative calculations of catastrophic tipping points. Anthropomorphic and speculative AI conceptualizations prevail, while interdisciplinary perspectives that consider issues of infrastructure, social agency, Big Tech power position and politics remain scarce. Delineating how these speculative tendencies are detrimental to the current regulatory need to tackle AI harms, we deduce an AI X-risk heuristic and advocate for a shift in attention from the maximum possible negative consequences to the structural and socio-technical characteristics of how AI is embedded—which are the prerequisites for any AI futures to emerge.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AI and Ethics
Published
2026-02-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-025-00928-w
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

AI going rogue? An integrative narrative review of the tacit assumptions underlying existential AI-risks

Reinhard Heil, Clemens Ackerl, Jascha Bareis
AI and Ethics
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

AI going rogue? An integrative narrative review of the tacit assumptions underlying existential AI-risks

Reinhard Heil, Clemens Ackerl, Jascha Bareis
article en

Abstract

Abstract This paper presents an integrative narrative review of the tacit background assumptions underlying AI existential risk (X-risks) futures. Once confined to science fiction, concerns about AI X-risks now shape debates at the crossroads of the tech world, NGOs, politics and (social) media. Despite growing attention, the plausibility of AI surpassing human controllability remains highly contested. Examining 81 peer-reviewed papers from Scopus and Web of Science, we find a fragmented discourse characterized by bold yet often unsubstantiated claims, including accelerationist growth models and speculative calculations of catastrophic tipping points. Anthropomorphic and speculative AI conceptualizations prevail, while interdisciplinary perspectives that consider issues of infrastructure, social agency, Big Tech power position and politics remain scarce. Delineating how these speculative tendencies are detrimental to the current regulatory need to tackle AI harms, we deduce an AI X-risk heuristic and advocate for a shift in attention from the maximum possible negative consequences to the structural and socio-technical characteristics of how AI is embedded—which are the prerequisites for any AI futures to emerge.

AI and EthicsVol. 6(1)
Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (DE), University of Fribourg (CH)
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
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.

AI going rogue? An integrative narrative review of the tacit assumptions underlying existential AI-risks — Reinhard Heil, Clemens Ackerl, et al. · AI and Ethics (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS