Get the latest news, advances in research, policy work, and education program updates from HAI in your inbox weekly.
Sign Up For Latest News
How policymakers can best regulate AI to balance innovation with public interests and human rights.

As Chinese AI closes the capability gap, Washington and Silicon Valley debate open-weight models. Stanford HAI's James Landay says it's the right conversation framed the wrong way.

As Chinese AI closes the capability gap, Washington and Silicon Valley debate open-weight models. Stanford HAI's James Landay says it's the right conversation framed the wrong way.
In January 2026, Utah announced a first-of-its kind pilot program allowing an autonomous artificial intelligence (AI) agent to renew prescriptions for consumers who request it. The state agreed not to enforce its unprofessional conduct laws against the developer, Doctronic, if the company adheres to a contract that includes safety and privacy protections. The pilot program includes 192 drugs for chronic conditions. Although physicians will initially validate the AI’s actions, the pilot program will swiftly become one of the first deployments at scale of an autonomous, agentic system in medicine. The announcement prompted concern from associations of physicians and pharmacists who opined that AI “should NOT be making care decisions.”
In January 2026, Utah announced a first-of-its kind pilot program allowing an autonomous artificial intelligence (AI) agent to renew prescriptions for consumers who request it. The state agreed not to enforce its unprofessional conduct laws against the developer, Doctronic, if the company adheres to a contract that includes safety and privacy protections. The pilot program includes 192 drugs for chronic conditions. Although physicians will initially validate the AI’s actions, the pilot program will swiftly become one of the first deployments at scale of an autonomous, agentic system in medicine. The announcement prompted concern from associations of physicians and pharmacists who opined that AI “should NOT be making care decisions.”
We welcome proposals for research projects that tackle important challenges and opportunities in this space from either a technical or social science perspective, with findings that can generate policy insights and recommendations.
We welcome proposals for research projects that tackle important challenges and opportunities in this space from either a technical or social science perspective, with findings that can generate policy insights and recommendations.

This brief highlights the emergence of world models and outlines a first-of-its-kind governance and policy agenda for the technology.

This brief highlights the emergence of world models and outlines a first-of-its-kind governance and policy agenda for the technology.

As artificial intelligence moves beyond language into the physical world through "world models," Stanford researchers warn that policymakers face an even steeper governance challenge than with large language models—and the window to get ahead of the technology is closing fast.
As artificial intelligence moves beyond language into the physical world through "world models," Stanford researchers warn that policymakers face an even steeper governance challenge than with large language models—and the window to get ahead of the technology is closing fast.

Health insurers and health care provider organizations are increasingly using artificial intelligence (AI) tools in prior authorization and claims processes. AI offers many potential benefits, but its adoption has raised concerns about the role of the “humans in the loop,” users’ understanding of AI, opacity of algorithmic determinations, underperformance in certain tasks, automation bias, and unintended social consequences. To date, institutional governance by insurers and providers has not fully met the challenge of ensuring responsible use. However, several steps could be taken to help realize the benefits of AI use while minimizing risks. Drawing on empirical work on AI use and our own ethical assessments of provider-facing tools as part of the AI governance process at Stanford Health Care, we examine why utilization review has attracted so much AI innovation and why it is challenging to ensure responsible use of AI. We conclude with several steps that could be taken to help realize the benefits of AI use while minimizing risks.
Health insurers and health care provider organizations are increasingly using artificial intelligence (AI) tools in prior authorization and claims processes. AI offers many potential benefits, but its adoption has raised concerns about the role of the “humans in the loop,” users’ understanding of AI, opacity of algorithmic determinations, underperformance in certain tasks, automation bias, and unintended social consequences. To date, institutional governance by insurers and providers has not fully met the challenge of ensuring responsible use. However, several steps could be taken to help realize the benefits of AI use while minimizing risks. Drawing on empirical work on AI use and our own ethical assessments of provider-facing tools as part of the AI governance process at Stanford Health Care, we examine why utilization review has attracted so much AI innovation and why it is challenging to ensure responsible use of AI. We conclude with several steps that could be taken to help realize the benefits of AI use while minimizing risks.

This brief demonstrates how real-time monitoring can address critical gaps in the oversight of radiological AI tools.
This brief demonstrates how real-time monitoring can address critical gaps in the oversight of radiological AI tools.




Policymakers, academics, healthcare providers, AI developers, and patient advocates convened by Stanford HAI identify critical gaps in how we regulate AI tools used for therapy and emotional support.
Policymakers, academics, healthcare providers, AI developers, and patient advocates convened by Stanford HAI identify critical gaps in how we regulate AI tools used for therapy and emotional support.
