Read, compare, question

Knowledge to build on.

Research, standards and practical sources on knowledge, human judgement and AI. Each source explains its relevance and the limits of what you can conclude from it.

60 resources · 11 topics · EN / NL

Five places to start

A short route: understand the proposition, compare established practice and test the claims.

  1. Understand the propositionArtiProof · whitepaper 1.2
  2. Compare established practiceISO 30401 · knowledge management
  3. Examine human judgementBainbridge · Ironies of Automation
  4. Trace the provenanceW3C · PROV-O
  5. Make claims testableCOS · Registered Reports

ArtiProof · AP-WP-01 / 02 / 03 / 04 / 05

Our whitepapers

Five whitepapers, with versions and direct PDF links. The sector and society papers are available in English and Dutch. Our own research propositions are clearly labelled as ArtiProof material.

Explore the five whitepapers →All publications and earlier editionsFor the general whitepaper, NL 1.1 is an earlier edition; the new sector and society papers each have Dutch and English versions 1.0.

Explore the library

Clear filters

60 resources

Our whitepaperStart here

Keeping Organisational Knowledge Dependable in the Age of AI

ArtiProof / KopKen VZW · 2026 · EN · 1.2 EN

The current English introduction to Source, Craft and Generated Knowledge and the five assurance properties.

Why this source?

Start with the proposition being investigated, then compare it with established approaches and critical evidence.

What to bear in mind

Informative ArtiProof publication. Research-ready, not broadly independently validated; first independent replication pending.

Our whitepaper

ArtiProof and ISO 30401 — From Knowledge Management to Knowledge-Fitness Review

ArtiProof / KopKen VZW · 2026 · EN · 1.1 EN

A proposed review of specific knowledge dependencies within an existing knowledge-management environment.

Why this source?

Read alongside ISO 30401; test added value against competent knowledge management and ordinary peer review.

What to bear in mind

Informative ArtiProof publication. Research-ready, not broadly independently validated; first independent replication pending. No ISO endorsement or route to conformity.

Our whitepaper

ArtiProof and DORA — The Knowledge Behind Digital Operational Resilience

ArtiProof / KopKen VZW · 2026 · EN · 1.1 EN

A proposed knowledge-fitness review for recovery, supplier exit and AI-assisted operational work.

Why this source?

Connects operational resilience with the understanding needed to justify consequential recovery decisions.

What to bear in mind

Informative ArtiProof publication. Research-ready, not broadly independently validated; first independent replication pending. Not a legal opinion, compliance assessment or recovery guarantee.

Our research proposition

Link checked ·

Our whitepaper

Who Will Know How Tomorrow? A Sector Perspective

ArtiProof / KopKen VZW · 2026 · EN / NL · 1.0 · EN / NL

Examines how a sector can retain the knowledge and craft capability needed to act when people, suppliers and technologies change.

Why this source?

Extends the knowledge question across organisational boundaries: who can understand, transfer and recover a consequential capability?

What to bear in mind

Conceptual whitepaper, version 1.0. Proposed applications require testing; publication does not establish independent validation.

Our whitepaper

Knowledge Autonomy in Society

ArtiProof / KopKen VZW · 2026 · EN / NL · 1.0 · EN / NL

Explores whether a society retains enough understanding and practical capability to sustain selected functions under changing dependencies.

Why this source?

Connects knowledge autonomy with informed reliance, institutional learning and the ability to respond when usual support is unavailable.

What to bear in mind

Conceptual whitepaper, version 1.0. It proposes bounded investigation, not a national ranking or a validated societal assurance measure.

StandardStart here

ISO 30401:2018 — Knowledge management systems

ISO · 2018 · EN

Knowledge management as an established organisational discipline.

Why this source?

A strong comparator for ArtiProof: start by crediting what competent knowledge management already provides.

What to bear in mind

Paid standard; public overview. Consult the applicable edition for requirements.

Established foundation

Access may be restricted ·

Research paperStart here

Ironies of Automation

Lisanne Bainbridge · 1983 · EN

A classic analysis of the demands automation leaves to human operators.

Why this source?

Explains why people still need to understand, intervene and recover when automation encounters an exception.

What to bear in mind

Analysis of automation published in 1983, not a direct experiment on contemporary generative AI.

Established foundation

Access may be restricted ·

GuidanceStart here

Registered Reports

Center for Open Science · EN

Peer review of research questions and methods before results are known.

Why this source?

A concrete route for strengthening ArtiProof's proposed comparative studies.

What to bear in mind

A publishing format with quality and protocol conditions, not a guarantee of publication or correct conclusions.

Comparator

Link checked ·

Research paper

Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation

Wesley M. Cohen & Daniel A. Levinthal · Administrative Science Quarterly · 1990 · EN

Develops absorptive capacity: recognising, assimilating and applying external knowledge, drawing on prior related knowledge.

Why this source?

A foundation for asking whether access to information is accompanied by the capability to understand and use it.

What to bear in mind

An organisational learning and innovation argument, not a direct test of ArtiProof or societal knowledge autonomy. Full-text access may be restricted.

Established foundation

Access may be restricted ·

Research paper

A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation

Ikujiro Nonaka · Organization Science · 1994 · EN

A theoretical account of organisational knowledge creation involving tacit and explicit knowledge.

Why this source?

Credits an established knowledge-management foundation when discussing how practical understanding and articulated information interact.

What to bear in mind

Conceptual background, not a finding that all practical knowledge can be captured in documents. Publisher metadata and abstract; full access may be restricted.

Established foundation

Access may be restricted ·

Research paper

AI as an Epistemic Technology

Ramón Alvarado · 2023 · EN

A philosophical framing of AI as technology used to perform epistemic operations.

Why this source?

Helps explain why AI's role in knowledge deserves specific attention.

What to bear in mind

Philosophical analysis, not empirical evidence for ArtiProof effectiveness.

Background

Link checked ·

Research paper

AI can help humans find common ground in democratic deliberation

Tessler et al. / Google DeepMind · 2024 · EN

Research on AI-assisted deliberation and finding common ground.

Why this source?

Distinguishes support for deliberation from factual verification.

What to bear in mind

Agreement is not evidence that a claim is true; the study setting limits the conclusion.

Perspective

Artificial intelligence and illusions of understanding in scientific research

Lisa Messeri and M. J. Crockett · 2024 · EN

Discusses how greater scientific output can coexist with illusions of understanding.

Why this source?

Connects research productivity with the separate question of what researchers understand.

What to bear in mind

Perspective article; not a controlled demonstration of inevitable cognitive decline.

Background

Link checked ·

Research report

Assessing Open Strategic Autonomy

Henning Kroll · European Commission Joint Research Centre · 2023 · EN

Develops a two-dimensional index of EU-27 autonomy in industrial ecosystems and strategic technologies.

Why this source?

A comparator for distinguishing production and innovation dependencies from the narrower knowledge questions in the sector and society papers.

What to bear in mind

An aggregate policy analysis with its own indicators and scope. Its results cannot be transferred directly to an organisation or an ArtiProof assessment.

Framework

C.O.R.E. — Communities of Resilience and Excellence

NIST Baldrige Program / C.O.R.E. · EN

A Baldrige-aligned approach supporting community collaboration, shared priorities, data use and continuous improvement.

Why this source?

Shows an established way to organise work across institutions when exploring community resilience and knowledge dependencies.

What to bear in mind

A programme overview, not causal evidence that the approach works in every setting or validation of ArtiProof’s society proposal.

Research paper

Closing the AI Accountability Gap

Raji et al. · 2020 · EN

A framework for internal algorithmic auditing across a system's lifecycle.

Why this source?

A substantial existing comparator for any new assurance workflow.

What to bear in mind

Internal auditing is not independent review; the proposed framework does not establish universal effectiveness.

Comparator

Link checked ·

Research paper

Datasheets for Datasets

Gebru et al. · 2021 · EN

A structured approach to documenting datasets and their intended use.

Why this source?

Useful inspiration for recording source context and limitations.

What to bear in mind

Author copy; journal publication 2021, first preprint 2018. Completing a datasheet does not guarantee data quality.

Comparator

Link checked ·

Guidance

Digital Operational Resilience Act — official overview

EIOPA · EN

Official overview of DORA and links to the associated regulatory instruments.

Why this source?

Helps readers place the ArtiProof application within the wider supervisory and regulatory framework.

What to bear in mind

An overview and navigation source; consult the applicable legal texts for exact obligations. The page changes over time.

Legislation

DORA — ICT third-party policy and exit plans (EU 2024/1773)

European Commission · 2024 · EN

Technical standards for policy on ICT contracts supporting critical or important functions. Article 10 addresses documented exit plans and their review and testing.

Why this source?

Provides a concrete legal reference for examining whether supplier transitions preserve usable operational understanding.

What to bear in mind

Applies within its defined regulatory scope. The knowledge-transfer questions proposed by ArtiProof are additional interpretations, not new legal duties.

Established foundation

Link checked ·

Reference

DORA — legislation and supervisory references

FSMA · EN

Belgian supervisor’s index of DORA legislation, including ICT contracts, the information register and incident-reporting instruments.

Why this source?

A practical route from the DORA whitepaper to primary instruments relevant to Belgian financial entities.

What to bear in mind

An index does not settle an entity’s obligations. Check the linked instruments, applicable scope and current supervisory guidance.

Legislation

DORA — Regulation (EU) 2022/2554

European Parliament and Council · 2022 · EN

EU legislation on digital operational resilience for the financial sector, covering ICT risk, incidents, testing and third-party dependencies.

Why this source?

The legal starting point for the DORA whitepaper, including existing duties concerning knowledge, training, recovery and responsibility.

What to bear in mind

Scope, proportionality, amendments and secondary legislation matter. An ArtiProof review does not establish DORA compliance.

Established foundation

Link checked ·

Research paper

Epistemic Dependence

John Hardwig · 1985 · EN

A classic discussion of dependence on other people's expertise.

Why this source?

Reminds readers that dependence on knowledge they cannot personally reconstruct predates AI.

What to bear in mind

Philosophical article. Full-text access may require a subscription.

Established foundation

Access may be restricted ·

Legislation

EU AI Act — Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

European Union · 2024 · EN

The official published text of the EU AI Act.

Why this source?

Use the official record for legal references rather than a third-party summary.

What to bear in mind

Links to the original act. Consult EUR-Lex's current consolidated text for amendments and applicability.

Background

Access may be restricted ·

Tool

Full Fact AI

Full Fact · EN

Technology supporting professional fact-checking work.

Why this source?

Shows an established approach to finding and checking public claims.

What to bear in mind

Organisation's own description; not an independent performance audit.

Comparator

Link checked ·

Research paper

Generative AI at Work

Brynjolfsson, Li & Raymond · 2025 · EN

A field study of AI assistance among customer-support agents reports productivity gains, with differences across workers.

Why this source?

A positive counterweight: AI can help spread useful practice, so knowledge loss should not be assumed.

What to bear in mind

Staggered deployment in one business setting; neither a universal productivity forecast nor validation of ArtiProof.

Research paper

Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics

Bastani et al. / PNAS · 2025 · EN

A randomised school experiment separating AI-assisted practice from subsequent unassisted performance. Tutor safeguards mitigated the adverse learning effect.

Why this source?

Makes retained capability and the design of AI assistance testable questions.

What to bear in mind

One Turkish high school and short-term maths outcomes; not a general estimate for adult workplaces. The publisher records an author-affiliation correction.

Practitioner article

Getting More from Your Team Health Checks

Spotify Engineering · 2023 · EN

Practical advice on making health checks useful for a team.

Why this source?

A close comparator for light-touch team reflection and knowledge conversations.

What to bear in mind

Practitioner experience; self-ratings are not objective measures of competence.

Comparator

Link checked ·

Research report

Global Knowledge Index 2025

UNDP / Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Knowledge Foundation · 2025 · EN

Compares national knowledge systems through indicators covering education, research, technology, the economy and their wider environment.

Why this source?

A useful comparison for the society paper: national knowledge conditions and the ability to sustain a specific function are different questions.

What to bear in mind

An aggregate index, not a direct measure of operational knowledge fitness. The report is the 2025 edition; the linked publication page is dated February 2026.

Framework

INK-managementmodel

Stichting INK · NL

An established Dutch-language organisational development model.

Why this source?

Provides a local-language comparison for management, learning and improvement.

What to bear in mind

The framework's own description is not independent evidence of effectiveness.

Comparator

Link checked ·

Standard

ISO/IEC 42001:2023 — AI management systems

ISO/IEC · 2023 · EN

An AI management-system standard for organisations.

Why this source?

Helps distinguish AI management requirements from ArtiProof's research proposition.

What to bear in mind

Paid standard; public overview checked. Inclusion does not imply certification.

Established foundation

Access may be restricted ·

Research review

Learning Versus Performance: An Integrative Review

Soderstrom & Bjork / UCLA · 2015 · EN

Explains why immediate task performance can diverge from lasting learning.

Why this source?

Supports assessing retention and transfer, rather than assuming successful assisted work proves independent capability.

What to bear in mind

Review of learning research, not a study of generative AI or ArtiProof.

Research paper

Model Cards for Model Reporting

Mitchell et al. · 2019 · EN

Structured documentation of a model's intended uses and performance.

Why this source?

A concrete example of making scope and limitations visible.

What to bear in mind

Author copy; conference publication 2019, preprint first posted 2018. Documentation is not validation.

Comparator

Link checked ·

Guidance

NIST AI 600-1 — Generative AI Profile

NIST · 2024 · EN

Risk-management guidance focused on generative AI.

Why this source?

Useful for connecting knowledge-quality questions with existing GenAI risk practice.

What to bear in mind

Voluntary guidance; actions must be adapted to the application and its risks.

Established foundation

Link checked ·

Framework

NIST AI Risk Management Framework

NIST · 2023 · EN

A voluntary framework for identifying and managing AI risks.

Why this source?

Gives readers an established reference alongside ArtiProof's narrower knowledge questions.

What to bear in mind

A voluntary risk framework; using it does not guarantee correct outcomes or compliance.

Established foundation

Link checked ·

Guidance

NIST AI RMF Playbook

NIST · EN

Suggested actions for putting the AI RMF into practice.

Why this source?

A practical starting point for readers who want actions and questions.

What to bear in mind

Living guidance with selectable actions, not an exhaustive checklist for every use.

Comparator

Link checked ·

Guidance

NIST SP 800-53A Rev. 5 — Assessing Security and Privacy Controls

NIST · Joint Task Force · 2022 · EN

A methodology and adaptable procedures for assessing security and privacy controls, with assessment planning and analysis of results.

Why this source?

An established comparator for evidence-based assessment: ArtiProof should explain its added value alongside competent existing assurance practice.

What to bear in mind

Its subject is security and privacy controls. It is not a general knowledge-assurance standard. The official page also identifies later release updates.

Research paper

Not all cognitive offloading is equal

Zhu et al. · 2026 · EN

Distinguishes dependent and autonomous offloading to generative AI.

Why this source?

A useful counterweight to treating all AI assistance as lost capability.

What to bear in mind

Three-wave self-report study, mostly young Chinese students; perceived capability is not demonstrated skill. Associations do not establish causation.

Counterpoint

Link checked ·

Research paper

Of opaque oracles

Jakob Ortmann · 2025 · EN

Argues that AI dependence need not create a novel problem for social epistemology.

Why this source?

An especially valuable challenge to novelty claims around AI and epistemic dependence.

What to bear in mind

A philosophical counterargument, not an endorsement or empirical validation of ArtiProof.

Counterpoint

Link checked ·

Reference

Operationalisation of Open Strategic Autonomy in industrial innovation

Fraunhofer ISI · 2023 · EN

Project description explaining the concepts and patent, trade and production data behind research on open strategic autonomy.

Why this source?

Makes the research setting behind the JRC report visible and helps compare what different autonomy measures actually observe.

What to bear in mind

Background to the same research project as the JRC report; it is not independent corroboration or a separate validation study.

Research paper

Organizational Memory

James P. Walsh & Gerardo Rivera Ungson · Academy of Management Review · 1991 · EN

Develops a framework for organisational memory and the acquisition, retention and retrieval of information.

Why this source?

Provides established concepts for examining what organisations preserve and how retained information becomes available for later work.

What to bear in mind

Conceptual foundation, not a direct test of knowledge recovery or ArtiProof. The publisher abstract was checked; full-text access may be restricted.

Established foundation

Access may be restricted ·

Guidance

Oslo Manual 2018 — Business innovation and knowledge flows

OECD / Eurostat · 2018 · EN

Chapter 6 describes knowledge flows, collaboration and their measurement across firms and other innovation actors.

Why this source?

Provides established concepts for investigating knowledge exchange between companies, education and research in a sector.

What to bear in mind

Statistical guidance for innovation measurement. Knowledge flows do not by themselves demonstrate dependable knowledge or recovery capability.

Established foundation

Link checked ·

Research report

Reproducibility and Replicability in Science

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine · 2019 · EN

Distinguishes recomputing results with the same data from testing a scientific question with new data.

Why this source?

Clarifies what evidence an independent replication claim should describe.

What to bear in mind

Terminology differs between disciplines. This consensus report does not establish that any ArtiProof study has been replicated.

Established foundation

Link checked ·

Guidance

Richt bij besluitvorming betekenisvolle menselijke tussenkomst in

Algoritmekader / Nederlandse overheid · NL

Dutch public-sector guidance on meaningful human intervention in algorithmic decision-making.

Why this source?

Useful prompts about competence, information and authority to intervene.

What to bear in mind

Jurisdiction- and context-specific guidance; a human sign-off alone does not demonstrate effective oversight.

Research paper

The Firm as a Distributed Knowledge System: A Constructionist Approach

Haridimos Tsoukas · Strategic Management Journal · 1996 · EN

Argues that organisational knowledge is dispersed, situated and continually emerging; no single actor can fully oversee it.

Why this source?

Challenges overly complete knowledge inventories and helps keep proposed knowledge maps bounded and revisable.

What to bear in mind

A conceptual argument. It does not imply that every dependency map is useless or that a specific mapping method has been tested.

Guidance

The Scrum Guide

Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland · 2020 · EN

The official definition of Scrum.

Why this source?

An established baseline for inspection, adaptation and team learning.

What to bear in mind

An additional knowledge review is not a required Scrum event. The guide is not an effectiveness study.

Comparator

Link checked ·

Reference

The Social Dimensions of Scientific Knowledge

Helen Longino / Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy · EN

An introduction to the social organisation of scientific knowledge and criticism.

Why this source?

Provides a foundation for understanding why organised criticism matters.

What to bear in mind

Philosophical reference; no claim that any particular review process is effective.

Established foundation

Link checked ·

Reference

The Tacit Dimension

Michael Polanyi · University of Chicago Press · 2009 · EN

A classic account of tacit knowing: practical understanding includes elements that cannot be fully put into words. Originally published in 1966.

Why this source?

A foundation and corrective for discussing Craft Knowledge without treating expertise as merely undocumented information.

What to bear in mind

The linked 2009 edition is a publisher description, not an open full text. No complete-book review is claimed here.

Established foundation

Access may be restricted ·

Research paper

To Trust or to Think: Cognitive Forcing Functions Can Reduce Overreliance on AI in AI-assisted Decision-making

Buçinca, Malaya & Gajos · 2021 · EN

An experiment testing interventions that require people to think before accepting AI advice.

Why this source?

Turns human oversight into a question about actual behaviour and interface design.

What to bear in mind

A 199-participant experiment in a specific task; reduced overreliance came with usability trade-offs and unequal benefits.

Research review

When Combinations of Humans and AI Are Useful: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Michelle Vaccaro, Abdullah Almaatouq & Thomas W. Malone · Nature Human Behaviour · 2024 · EN

Synthesises experiments comparing humans alone, AI alone and combined systems; outcomes vary by task and comparison.

Why this source?

Challenges the assumption that adding human involvement automatically improves AI-supported performance and reinforces the need for appropriate comparators.

What to bear in mind

The studies cover particular tasks, systems and populations. Aggregate findings are not an effect estimate for ArtiProof or every current AI system.

About this selection

We select sources that clarify a concrete knowledge question, credit existing work or offer a serious challenge. Standards, practical advice, philosophical arguments and empirical studies carry different kinds of evidence. Inclusion implies no partnership, certification or validation of ArtiProof.

KopKen inspired part of this selection. This library has its own focus on organisational knowledge, evaluation and justified reliance. KopKen →

Checking and maintenance

Link checks concern access, not the truth of every claim. The commentary is an editorial summary, not a systematic review or full methodological assessment.

Editorially revised: .

Report an error or suggest a source →