Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 7 minor 47 references

Generative AI in Financial Institution: A Global Survey of Opportunities, Threats, and Regulation

T0 review · 4 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Generative AI in finance brings real gains, but only when institutions add guardrails.

desk verdict A workmanlike but citation-broken survey: no new science, useful as a regulatory and industry map, and only worth peer review if the venue can insist on fixing the reference list and qualifying the industry statistics. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.21574 v1 pith:XU3WLZ5T submitted 2025-04-30 cs.CR cs.CE

Bikash Saha , Nanda Rani , Sandeep Kumar Shukla This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CRcs.CE
keywords GenerativeAIinFinanceFinancialServicesSectorRegulationAdversarialAttacksFraudandEthicalGovernance
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This survey attempts to establish that generative AI is becoming a core operational technology across finance—used in customer-facing chatbots, personalized advisory, fraud detection, compliance summarization, software development, and strategic planning—and that its benefits are real but conditional. The authors argue that the same models that create efficiency also expand the attack surface: AI-generated phishing, deepfake fraud, and malware are rising, while prompt injection, data poisoning, and model extraction target the AI systems themselves. They further argue that regulators are converging on risk-based rules, and that institutions can capture the value only by pairing deployment with governance, validation, red-teaming, explainability, and human oversight.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a classification scheme that separates the financial institution's AI adoption surface from its AI risk surface. On the adoption side, the paper groups applications into customer-facing, risk-and-compliance, investment, developer-productivity, and strategic-planning functions and attaches to each the main technical enabler, such as retrieval-augmented generation for advisory or synthetic data for fraud training. On the risk side, it distinguishes threats enabled by generative AI from threats targeting generative AI systems, and maps the latter to an adversarial-tactics catalog covering prompt injection, poisoning, and extraction. The response side is a seven-stage secure AI lifecycle that pairs each threat with a control—red-teaming, model signing, audit trails, and human-in-the-loop thresholds—so that the survey's recommendation to treat AI models like high-risk financial products follows from the classification.

What would settle it

Collect incident-level data from a sample of banks for 2023-2025 and compare the growth in AI-crafted phishing, deepfake fraud attempts, and successful unauthorized transfers against the survey's cited figures; if independent records show flat or much smaller growth, the survey's central claim that generative AI is sharply escalating financial-crime risk would lose support.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the survey's own terms, the discovery is a structured map of a sector mid-transition: generative AI is not a single use case but a horizontal capability already visible in five functional areas, each with distinct technical methods such as retrieval-augmented generation, synthetic data augmentation, long-context summarization, and fine-tuned dialogue models. The paper's central claim is that the benefits are accompanied by a two-sided threat picture: criminals use generative AI to make phishing, impersonation, and malware more effective, while adversarial attackers target the models through prompt injection, data poisoning, model extraction, and adversarial inputs. Because financial decisions are high-stakes and regulated, the survey concludes that adoption is sustainable only through a secure AI lifecycle—secure data collection, validation and red-teaming, access control, monitoring, secure updates, incident response, and continuous governance—plus ethical controls for bias, explainability, privacy, accountability, and human-in-the-loop review.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the industry-reported statistics the survey cites—the 118% rise in AI-driven phishing, the $200-340 billion banking value, and the 26% executive deepfake rate—are accurate and representative, because the paper does not independently validate them.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Banks and fintechs can expect the fastest generative-AI gains in customer service and compliance summarization, where fine-tuned language models and retrieval-augmented generation already show measurable efficiency.
  • AI-generated phishing and deepfake impersonation will keep making social engineering cheaper and more convincing, so financial institutions should move beyond voice verification and single-factor email checks.
  • Models trained on internal financial data are at risk of data extraction and poisoning, making model provenance, checksums, and model signing necessary parts of procurement.
  • Regulators in major jurisdictions are moving toward risk-based AI rules, so institutions that classify their AI uses by risk level and document model cards will be better positioned for compliance.
  • Treating generative AI as a high-risk model, with pre-deployment validation, monitoring, and human review of critical outputs, is the paper's recommended path to capturing value without uncontrolled losses.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the survey's direction is right, an implicit consequence is that fraud defense becomes an AI-versus-AI race, with both attackers and defenders generating synthetic content at scale; a testable next step is measuring whether AI-assisted detection systems close the gap opened by AI-crafted phishing.
  • The survey's regulatory summary suggests a prediction the authors do not spell out: a de facto global standard will form around the strictest regime, so even institutions outside that jurisdiction should prepare for extraterritorial AI compliance.
  • A concrete way to extend the lifecycle claims is to run controlled red-teaming exercises on a customer-facing financial chatbot and measure how many prompt-injection attempts succeed before and after input sanitization and output filters are added.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 7 minor

Summary. This survey paper reviews the adoption, risks, regulation, and recommended practices for generative AI in financial institutions. It catalogs applications in customer-facing functions, risk and compliance, investment management, developer productivity, and strategic planning; categorizes emerging cybersecurity threats (including AI-generated phishing, deepfakes, and attacks targeting AI systems); outlines a secure AI lifecycle; discusses ethical concerns and governance; reviews regulatory initiatives in the US, EU, India, and Singapore; and concludes with recommendations for practitioners. The central claim is that GenAI offers substantial opportunities in finance while introducing significant cybersecurity and ethical risks that require robust governance and secure adoption practices.

Significance. The paper provides a broad, clearly organized synthesis of a fast-moving area, with useful taxonomy figures, a comprehensive regulatory overview (notably covering India and Singapore), and practical recommendations on secure AI adoption. If the citation and source-quality issues are fixed, it would serve as a reasonable entry point for researchers and practitioners. Its strengths are breadth, clarity, and organization; it does not introduce new methods, data, or verifiable predictions, and its quantified claims are drawn almost entirely from secondary industry sources. The survey would be more valuable if it included critical assessment of the statistics it relies on rather than presenting them as established facts.

major comments (4)
  1. [§9 References] The reference list is internally inconsistent, making several in-text attributions untraceable: [66] is used for both the NIST AI RMF in §7a and the Economic Times SBI LLM report in §2.1; [67] is used for both the stress-testing citation in §7b and the Axis Bank AHA page in §2.1; [68] is used for both the MITRE/Microsoft release in §7d and the HDFC Virtual RM page in §2.1. These duplicated numbers must be renumbered and all in-text citations updated before the survey can be evaluated for source support.
  2. [§3.1] The quantitative backbone of the threat narrative consists of three secondary-source statistics quoted without caveats: the 118% rise in AI-driven phishing (ref [34]), the 26% executive deepfake-target rate (ref [35]), and the 90% of companies reporting cyber-fraud in 2024 (also ref [34]). Each is drawn from a trade-press article or consultant release rather than a peer-reviewed or primary data source, and the definitions and samples behind the numbers are not discussed. Since §3.1's conclusion that 'the threat remains substantial' relies on these figures, the authors should either locate primary sources or explicitly frame these as vendor/industry estimates with appropriate hedging.
  3. [§2.4 and §2.5] Claims such as the '20–30% reduction in time-to-market' (ref [26]) and 'recent empirical studies confirm…' (ref [28]) are presented as established findings, but the cited sources are an EY promotional article and a McKinsey survey. The survey should distinguish between vendor/industry claims and academic evidence, and either soften the language or supply the underlying studies.
  4. [§6.1.2] In §6.1.2, the EU AI Act is cited as [61], but [61] is the MAS Project MindForge page; the EU AI Act reference appears to be [62]. The citation mismatch obscures the regulatory discussion and must be corrected along with the global renumbering.
minor comments (7)
  1. [§3] The text 'These treats are further classified' should read 'These threats are further classified.'
  2. [§4] The phrase 'The demonstrate a sample lifecycle in Figure 4' is ungrammatical; it should be 'Figure 4 demonstrates a sample lifecycle.'
  3. [§8 Conclusion] In the conclusion, 'reals the vast potential' should be 'reveals the vast potential.'
  4. [Abstract and §1] The manuscript repeatedly calls itself 'this chapter' in the abstract and introduction; if it is submitted as a journal article, the wording should be changed to 'this survey' or 'this paper.'
  5. [§9 References] The reference list jumps from [56] to [60]; entries [57]–[59] are missing. A global renumbering pass is needed.
  6. [Figure 1] Figure 1 is described as a section overview but no actual figure appears in the provided text; either include it or remove the reference.
  7. [§6.1.4] The SEC/CFPB discussion cites [64], which is a robo-advisory trust paper, not a regulatory source; the authors should cite the actual SEC proposed rule or CFPB document.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the survey makes no derived predictions, fits no parameters, and its central claims rest on external literature rather than self-referential reduction.

full rationale

The paper is a literature survey and contains no derivation chain of the kind in which an output is constructed from its own inputs. It fits no parameters, tests no hypotheses, and makes no quantitative predictions; the central claims about GenAI adoption, threats, regulation, and best practices are presented as syntheses of cited external work (e.g., McKinsey [3], PwC [4], CFO/Deloitte [35], MITRE ATLAS [43], EU AI Act [62]). The only self-citation, [72] to the authors' own prior work on LLM-generated cyberattack payloads, appears in §3.1 as support for one sub-claim: 'Security researchers have also found that open-source AI models, if fine-tuned on malware data, can produce ransomware and keyloggers [72].' That sub-claim is not the central thesis of the survey, is corroborated in the same section by independent references to WormGPT [37] and FraudGPT [38], and does not function as an unverified premise from which the survey's conclusions are deduced. Accordingly, none of the enumerated circularity patterns—self-definitional construction, fitted input called prediction, load-bearing self-citation, imported uniqueness, ansatz smuggled via citation, or renaming a known result—is present. The survey is self-contained as a survey; any concerns about the reliability of secondhand statistics are evidence-quality issues, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities are present because this is a survey. The central claims rest on the reliability of cited secondary sources and the representativeness of the cited examples.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption The cited industry reports and news articles accurately represent real GenAI adoption and threat levels.
    The survey builds its narrative on statistics from McKinsey, PwC, PlanAdviser, CFO, and company blogs without independent verification, e.g., the 118% phishing rise in §3.1 and the $200-340 billion banking value in §1.
  • domain assumption The named institutional examples (SBI, Axis Bank, HDFC, Citi, JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs) are representative of global financial practice.
    The survey generalizes from a small set of named institutions, mostly Indian and American, to a 'global' ecosystem in §2 and §6.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Generative AI in Financial Institution: A Global Survey of Opportunities, Threats, and Regulation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XU3WLZ5T

@misc{pith2026250421574,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Generative AI in Financial Institution: A Global Survey of Opportunities, Threats, and Regulation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XU3WLZ5T}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.21574}
}
read the original abstract

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is rapidly reshaping the global financial landscape, offering unprecedented opportunities to enhance customer engagement, automate complex workflows, and extract actionable insights from vast financial data. This survey provides an overview of GenAI adoption across the financial ecosystem, examining how banks, insurers, asset managers, and fintech startups worldwide are integrating large language models and other generative tools into their operations. From AI-powered virtual assistants and personalized financial advisory to fraud detection and compliance automation, GenAI is driving innovation across functions. However, this transformation comes with significant cybersecurity and ethical risks. We discuss emerging threats such as AI-generated phishing, deepfake-enabled fraud, and adversarial attacks on AI systems, as well as concerns around bias, opacity, and data misuse. The evolving global regulatory landscape is explored in depth, including initiatives by major financial regulators and international efforts to develop risk-based AI governance. Finally, we propose best practices for secure and responsible adoption - including explainability techniques, adversarial testing, auditability, and human oversight. Drawing from academic literature, industry case studies, and policy frameworks, this chapter offers a perspective on how the financial sector can harness GenAI's transformative potential while navigating the complex risks it introduces.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [66]

    Artificial intelligence risk management framework (AI RMF 1.0)

    AI, N., 2023. Artificial intelligence risk management framework (AI RMF 1.0). URL: https://nvlpubs. nist. gov/nistpubs/ai/nist. ai , pp.100-1. [67] Onuoha, D.U., Stress Testing Bank Financial Systems: A Technological Perspective. [68] MITRE, 2024. MITRE and Microsoft collaborate to address generative AI security risks . [online] Available at: https://www....

    work page arXiv 2023

  2. [34]

    Generative AI email scams make cyber fraud rampant in 2024

    PlanAdviser, 2024. Generative AI email scams make cyber fraud rampant in 2024 . [online] Available at: https://www.planadviser.com/generative-ai-email-scams-make-cyber-fraud-rampant-2024/ [Accessed 28 April 2025]. [35] CFO, 2024. 26% of executives targeted by deepfakes as fraudsters aim at financial sector: Deloitte . [online] Available at: https://www.cf...

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    WormGPT” [37] and “FraudGPT

    E MERGING C YBERSECURITY T HREATS TO F INANCIAL I NSTITUTION While generative AI unlocks value, it also introduces new cybersecurity threats and amplifies existing ones. These threats fall into two broad categories: (a) threats enabled by GenAI – where malicious actors use generative AI to enhance their attacks – and (b) threats targeting AI systems deplo...

    work page 2024

  4. [28]

    The State of AI in 2023: Generative AI’s breakout year

    McKinsey & Company, 2023. The State of AI in 2023: Generative AI’s breakout year . [online] Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/quantumblack/our-insights/the-state-of-ai-in-2023-generative-ais-breakout-year [Accessed 28 April 2025]. [29] Lui, A. and Lamb, G.W., 2018. Artificial intelligence and augmented intelligence collaboration: regaini...

    work page 2023

  5. [1]

    and Avila, R., 2023

    Achiam, J., Adler, S., Agarwal, S., Ahmad, L., Akkaya, I., Aleman, F.L., Almeida, D., Altenschmidt, J., Altman, S., Anadkat, S. and Avila, R., 2023. Gpt-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774

    arXiv 2023

  6. [2]

    and Mann, G., 2023

    Wu, S., Irsoy, O., Lu, S., Dabravolski, V., Dredze, M., Gehrmann, S., Kambadur, P., Rosenberg, D. and Mann, G., 2023. Bloomberggpt: A large language model for finance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.17564

    arXiv 2023

  7. [4]

    The demonstrate a sample lifecycle in Figure 4

    M ITIGATION AND S ECURE AI L IFECYCLE In response to the emerging threats against AI systems, financial institutions are adopting a structured secure AI development lifecycle, embedding security principles and risk controls systematically across every phase of AI development, deployment, and operation [44] [45] [46]. The demonstrate a sample lifecycle in ...

    work page

  8. [5]

    Financial institutions, given their direct impact on individuals' economic opportunities, must ensure that AI systems uphold fairness, transparency, privacy, and accountability

    E THICAL C ONCERNS AND G OVERNANCE The adoption of GenAI in financial services presents technical challenges along with significant ethical and governance concerns [7] [53] [54]. Financial institutions, given their direct impact on individuals' economic opportunities, must ensure that AI systems uphold fairness, transparency, privacy, and accountability. ...

    work page

Show all 47 references
  1. [6]

    guardrails

    R EGULATORY L ANDSCAPE The rapid rise of AI in financial services has prompted regulators across the globe to react, seeking to e nsure innovation does not outpace oversight. Financial regulators are concerned with safeguarding stability, consumer protection, fairness, and mar...

    2023

  2. [7]

    GenAI and LLM for Financial Institutions: A Corporate Strategic Survey

    Xu, J., 2024. GenAI and LLM for Financial Institutions: A Corporate Strategic Survey. Available at SSRN 4988118 . 27 Generative AI in Financial Institution [8] Raza, S.A., Syed, D., Rizwan, S. and Ahmed, M., 2025. Trends of AI in Financial Services and Its Applications. In The...

    2024

  3. [8]

    Although most of them are in experimental form and have started deploying pilots, there are potential use cases that we believe will be deployed

    C ONCLUSION Generative AI is poised to redefine the financial landscape, offering institutions powerful tools to enhance customer service, streamline operations, and unlock data-driven insights. Although most of them are in experimental form and have started deploying pilots, ...

  4. [9]

    Scaling Gen AI in banking: Choosing the best operating model

    McKinsey & Company, 2024. Scaling Gen AI in banking: Choosing the best operating model . [online] Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/financial-services/our-insights/scaling-gen-ai-in-banking-choosing-the-best-operating-model [Accessed 28 April 2025]. [4] The Eco...

    2024

  5. [10]

    and Sinha, M., 2022

    Bhattacharya, C. and Sinha, M., 2022. The role of artificial intelligence in banking for leveraging customer experience. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal , 16 (5)

    2022

  6. [11]

    and Liu, X.Y., 2024, November

    Tian, F., Byadgi, A., Kim, D.S., Zha, D., White, M., Xiao, K. and Liu, X.Y., 2024, November. Customized fingpt search agents using foundation models. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM International Conference on AI in Finance (pp. 469-477)

    2024

  7. [12]

    and Li, Y., RBPA: Retrieval-Augmented-Generation based Personal Investment Assistant

    Zeng, X. and Li, Y., RBPA: Retrieval-Augmented-Generation based Personal Investment Assistant

  8. [13]

    and Panteli, N., 2024

    Kshetri, N., Dwivedi, Y.K., Davenport, T.H. and Panteli, N., 2024. Generative artificial intelligence in marketing: Applications, opportunities, challenges, and research agenda. International Journal of Information Management , 75 , p.102716

    2024

  9. [14]

    and Leimeister, J., 2024

    Karst, F., Li, M. and Leimeister, J., 2024. Findex: A synthetic data sharing platform for financial fraud detection

    2024

  10. [15]

    and Zaslavskyi, V., 2024

    Pushkarenko, Y. and Zaslavskyi, V., 2024. Synthetic Data Generation for Fraud Detection Using Diffusion Models. Information & Security , 55 (2), pp.185-198

    2024

  11. [16]

    and Garcez, A.D.A., 2021

    Charitou, C., Dragicevic, S. and Garcez, A.D.A., 2021. Synthetic data generation for fraud detection using gans. arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.12546

    2021 arXiv

  12. [17]

    and Veloso, M., 2020, October

    Assefa, S.A., Dervovic, D., Mahfouz, M., Tillman, R.E., Reddy, P. and Veloso, M., 2020, October. Generating synthetic data in finance: opportunities, challenges and pitfalls. In Proceedings of the First ACM International Conference on AI in Finance (pp. 1-8)

    2020

  13. [18]

    and Tan, J., 2024

    Zhang, Y., Jin, H., Meng, D., Wang, J. and Tan, J., 2024. A comprehensive survey on process-oriented automatic text summarization with exploration of llm-based methods. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.02901

    2024

  14. [19]

    and Bhaduri, S., 2025

    Mackenzie, T., Radeljic, B., Salgado, L., Paul, A., Khan, R., Tursunbayeva, A., Perez, N. and Bhaduri, S., 2025. What We Do Not Know: GPT Use in Business and Management. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.05273

    2025 arXiv

  15. [20]

    Morgan, 2024

    J.P. Morgan, 2024. IndexGPT: The future of index creation . [online] Available at: https://www.jpmorgan.com/insights/markets/indices/indexgpt [Accessed 28 April 2025]. [20] Mishra, Vivek & Mandavia, Aayush & Adoyo, Gaston & Gupta, Devdas & Chand, Subhash. (2025). The Role of G...

    2025 doi

  16. [21]

    and Lee, Y.C., 2024

    Yang, Q. and Lee, Y.C., 2024. Enhancing Financial Advisory Services with GenAI: Consumer Perceptions and Attitudes Through Service-Dominant Logic and Artificial Intelligence Device Use Acceptance Perspectives. Journal of Risk and Financial Management , 17 (10), p.470

    2024

  17. [22]

    From Models to Markets: Generative AI and Its Emerging Role in Indian Financial Services

    Raju, R., 2025. From Models to Markets: Generative AI and Its Emerging Role in Indian Financial Services. Available at SSRN 5223947

    2025

  18. [23]

    More Than Just Efficiency: Impact of Generative AI on Developer Productivity

    Li, Mahei Manhai; Dickhaut, Ernestine; Bruhin, Olivia; Wache, Hendrik; and Weritz, Pauline, "More Than Just Efficiency: Impact of Generative AI on Developer Productivity" (2024). AMCIS 2024 Proceedings. 2. https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2024/incl_sustain/incl_sustain/2 [24] Gol...

    2024

  19. [30]

    Artificial Intelligence in Finance

    OECD, 2024. Artificial Intelligence in Finance . [online] Available at: https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/digital-finance/artificial-intelligence-in-finance.html [Accessed 28 April 2025]. [31] Huang, K., Chen, X., Yang, Y., Ponnapalli, J. and Huang, G., 2023. ChatGPT i...

    2024

  20. [32]

    and Balch, T., 2024, November

    Kurshan, E., Mehta, D. and Balch, T., 2024, November. AI versus AI in Financial Crimes & Detection: GenAI Crime Waves to Co-Evolutionary AI. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM International Conference on AI in Finance (pp. 745-751)

    2024

  21. [33]

    Generative artificial Intelligence, Threat or challenge for the modern banking system

    Stanoevska, E.P., 2024. Generative artificial Intelligence, Threat or challenge for the modern banking system. Knowledge-International Journal , 66 (1), pp.53-59

    2024

  22. [38]

    WormGPT/FraudGPT The ugly, dangerous" cousin" of ChatGPT

    Kempen, A., 2024. WormGPT/FraudGPT The ugly, dangerous" cousin" of ChatGPT. Servamus Community-based Safety and Security Magazine , 117 (11), pp.19-21

    2024

  23. [39]

    Trust No AI: Prompt Injection Along The CIA Security Triad

    Rehberger, J., 2024. Trust No AI: Prompt Injection Along The CIA Security Triad. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.06090

    2024 arXiv

  24. [40]

    and Fritz, M., 2023, November

    Greshake, K., Abdelnabi, S., Mishra, S., Endres, C., Holz, T. and Fritz, M., 2023, November. Not what you've signed up for: Compromising real-world llm-integrated applications with indirect prompt injection. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM Workshop on Artificial Intelligence an...

    2023

  25. [41]

    and Yu, P.S., 2024

    He, F., Zhu, T., Ye, D., Liu, B., Zhou, W. and Yu, P.S., 2024. The emerged security and privacy of llm agent: A survey with case studies. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.19354 . 29 Generative AI in Financial Institution [42] Mithril Security, 2024. PoisonGPT: How we hid a lobotomize...

    2024

  26. [45]

    and Papenbrock, J., 2022

    Fritz-Morgenthal, S., Hein, B. and Papenbrock, J., 2022. Financial risk management and explainable, trustworthy, responsible AI. Frontiers in artificial intelligence , 5 , p.779799

    2022

  27. [46]

    Towards a responsible AI development lifecycle: Lessons from information security

    Galinkin, E., 2022. Towards a responsible AI development lifecycle: Lessons from information security. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.02958

    2022 arXiv

  28. [47]

    and Abu-Ghazaleh, N., 2023

    Shayegani, E., Mamun, M.A.A., Fu, Y., Zaree, P., Dong, Y. and Abu-Ghazaleh, N., 2023. Survey of vulnerabilities in large language models revealed by adversarial attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.10844

    2023 arXiv

  29. [48]

    and Heidari, H., 2024, October

    Feffer, M., Sinha, A., Deng, W.H., Lipton, Z.C. and Heidari, H., 2024, October. Red-Teaming for generative AI: Silver bullet or security theater?. In Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (Vol. 7, pp. 421-437)

    2024

  30. [49]

    and Oladoyinbo, T.O., 2024

    Olabanji, S.O., Olaniyi, O.O., Adigwe, C.S., Okunleye, O.J. and Oladoyinbo, T.O., 2024. AI for Identity and Access Management (IAM) in the cloud: Exploring the potential of artificial intelligence to improve user authentication, authorization, and access control within cloud-b...

    2024

  31. [50]

    and Thakkar, S., 2024

    Andreoni, M., Lunardi, W.T., Lawton, G. and Thakkar, S., 2024. Enhancing autonomous system security and resilience with generative AI: A comprehensive survey. IEEE Access

    2024

  32. [51]

    and Khan, R.A., 2024

    Almagrabi, A.O. and Khan, R.A., 2024. Optimizing secure AI lifecycle model management with innovative generative AI strategies. IEEE Access

    2024

  33. [52]

    and Williams, Z., 2023

    O'Brien, J., Ee, S. and Williams, Z., 2023. Deployment corrections: An incident response framework for frontier AI models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.00328

    2023 arXiv

  34. [53]

    and Bano, M., 2025

    Batool, A., Zowghi, D. and Bano, M., 2025. AI governance: a systematic literature review. AI and Ethics , pp.1-15

    2025

  35. [54]

    and Jha, A.K., 2025

    Vaish, S., Singh, M. and Jha, A.K., 2025. Challenges for Responsible Implementation of Generative AI in Fintech. In Generative AI in FinTech: Revolutionizing Finance Through Intelligent Algorithms (pp. 325-344). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland

    2025

  36. [55]

    and Pitts, J., 2025

    Gopal, S. and Pitts, J., 2025. GenAI: Unlocking Sustainability Insights and Driving Change in Fintech. In The FinTech Revolution: Bridging Geospatial Data Science, AI, and Sustainability (pp. 345-393). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland

    2025

  37. [56]

    Regulating Ai In Financial Services: Legal Frameworks And Compliance Challenges

    Mirishli, S., 2025. Regulating Ai In Financial Services: Legal Frameworks And Compliance Challenges. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.14541

    2025 arXiv

  38. [60]

    RBI’s framework for responsible and ethical enablement: Towards ethical AI in finance

    IndiaAI, 2024. RBI’s framework for responsible and ethical enablement: Towards ethical AI in finance . [online] Available at: https://indiaai.gov.in/article/rbi-s-framework-for-responsible-and-ethical-enablement-towards-ethical-ai-in-finance [Accessed 28 April 2025]. [61] Mone...

    2024

  39. [65]

    and George, A., 2025

    Gupta, N. and George, A., 2025. Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023: Charting the Future of India's Data Regulation. In Data Governance and the Digital Economy in Asia (pp. 34-53). Routledge

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.