Paper Type
ERF
Abstract
Public-sector education increasingly relies on artificial intelligence (AI) deployed through cloud-centered large language model (LLM) architectures that externalize inference, alignment, and control beyond institutional boundaries. This creates a structural tension: institutions remain accountable for AI behaviour they do not govern. We address this problem by conceptualizing responsible human-AI collaboration as a question of architectural governability, defined as the extent to which AI behaviour can be directed, audited, and adapted within institutional settings. We identify four conditions: locality, modularity, governance autonomy, and socio-technical fit, that structure control over agentic behaviour. By contrasting cloud centered LLM architectures with local small language model (SLM)-based multi-agent architectures, we show how alternative designs redistribute control, dependence, and alignment capacity. The paper advances a structural account of responsibility, positioning architectural design as a primary determinant of whether AI systems can be governed in contexts where accountability cannot be delegated.
Paper Number
1944
Recommended Citation
Tuguldur, Temuulen and Sonpatki, Ria, "Responsible Human-AI Collaboration as an Architectural Problem: Toward Architectural Governability" (2026). AMCIS 2026 Proceedings. 6.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2026/sig_svs/svs/6
Responsible Human-AI Collaboration as an Architectural Problem: Toward Architectural Governability
Public-sector education increasingly relies on artificial intelligence (AI) deployed through cloud-centered large language model (LLM) architectures that externalize inference, alignment, and control beyond institutional boundaries. This creates a structural tension: institutions remain accountable for AI behaviour they do not govern. We address this problem by conceptualizing responsible human-AI collaboration as a question of architectural governability, defined as the extent to which AI behaviour can be directed, audited, and adapted within institutional settings. We identify four conditions: locality, modularity, governance autonomy, and socio-technical fit, that structure control over agentic behaviour. By contrasting cloud centered LLM architectures with local small language model (SLM)-based multi-agent architectures, we show how alternative designs redistribute control, dependence, and alignment capacity. The paper advances a structural account of responsibility, positioning architectural design as a primary determinant of whether AI systems can be governed in contexts where accountability cannot be delegated.
When commenting on articles, please be friendly, welcoming, respectful and abide by the AIS eLibrary Discussion Thread Code of Conduct posted here.
Comments
SIG SVS