Mar 10, 2025

AI-Powered Policymaking: Behavioral Nudges and Democratic Accountability

michel chbeir, jana dagher

This research explores AI-driven policymaking, behavioral nudges, and democratic accountability, focusing on how governments use AI to shape citizen behavior. It highlights key risks such as transparency, cognitive security, and manipulation. Through a comparative analysis of the EU AI Act and Singapore’s AI Governance Framework, we assess how different models address AI safety and public trust. The study proposes policy solutions like algorithmic impact assessments, AI safety-by-design principles, and cognitive security standards to ensure AI-powered policymaking remains transparent, accountable, and aligned with democratic values.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

Hi Michel and Jana, I thought your project idea is good and relevant, and could be published as a peer-reviewed article, after further polishing. A few recommendations to strengthen your work:

(1) Overall, this is a very comprehensive paper, that touches upon many aspects of the subject; for the future, I’d suggest going more in depth into each section. I’m aware you had limited time to achieve this during the hackathon, but I’m mentioning in case you want to progress your work.

(2) Add citations in text, especially as you’re introducing a lot of definitions/concepts. Citations also help to clearly distinguish between what might be your perspective and that of the others/what is backed up by evidence.

(3) For section 1, there were a lot of examples used which I’d only suggest keeping in if you’re gonna extend the section and go more in-depth.

(4) For section 2, start first by explain why you chose Europe vs. Singapore specifically, it is easier for the reader to understand when they go through that section. In the same section, it’s great that you added a table and mentioned a summary of the comparison.

(5) I’d suggest more integration and transition between sections, for example: While I understand the comparison, I’d like to see that integrated into section 3 - and based on it, the implications to flow more naturally.

Nicely described and motivated introduction to past research on nudging. Raise important concerns and risks with AI driven / personalized nudging. This is a nicely written overview of the issues in this area. The paper does not present a research project proposal, however.

Thank you for submitting your work on ‘AI-Powered Policymaking: Behavioral Nudges and Democratic Accountability’ - it was interesting to read. Please see below for some feedback on your project:

1. Strengths of your proposal/ project:

- The abstract (and paper generally) is clear and well structure - it is immediately clear to me what you are working on, why it is deemed important, and what your project is looking to do.

- Clear definitions are provided from the offset, which helps aid read comprehension (e.g., ‘nudge’).

2. Areas for improvement:

- Large sections of the paper are unreferenced, so I would encourage the use of more evidence-based statements.

- Could you back up statements with examples? e.g., ‘AI-enhanced nudging offers unprecedented precision and scalability’ - how? Why?

- Key terms should be defined. E.g., you mention that ‘Transparency thus becomes a non negligible consideration’ (p.2) - how are you defining transparency?

- Overall, a clearer methodology (explicitly outlined), more critical analysis (vs descriptive language) and the insertion of a threat model(s) would greatly strengthen this paper.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

AI-Powered Policymaking: Behavioral Nudges and Democratic Accountability

},

author={

michel chbeir, jana dagher

},

date={

3/10/25

},

organization={Apart Research},

note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

Apr 27, 2026

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

PROTEUS (PROTein Evaluation for Unusual Sequences): Structure-Informed Safety Screening for de novo and Evasion-Prone Protein-Coding Sequences

AI protein design tools like RFdiffusion, ProteinMPNN, and Bindcraft make it trivial to produce low-homology sequences that fold into active, potentially hazardous architectures. However, sequence homology-based biosafety screening tools cannot detect proteins that pose functional risk through structurally novel mechanisms with no sequence precedent. We present a tiered computational pipeline that addresses this gap by combining MMseqs2 sequence alignment with structure-based comparison via FoldSeek and DALI against curated toxin databases totaling ~34,000 entries. AlphaFold2-predicted structures are screened for both global fold similarity (FoldSeek) and local active/allosteric site geometry (DALI), capturing convergent functional hazards that sequence screening misses. The pipeline was validated against a panel of toxins, benign proteins, structural mimics, and de novo-designed Munc13 binders, as well as modified ricin variants with residue substitutions. We additionally tested robustness to partial-synthesis evasion, where a bad actor submits multiple shorter coding sequences intended for downstream reassembly into a full toxin-coding gene. We found that while sequence-based screening did not identify any de novo ricin analogues with high certainty, the combined pipeline with FoldSeek and DALI identified all 24 tested de novo ricins as toxic.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.
This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.