Source assessmentSupporting
Hephaestus and Talos: The Legal Status and Obligation Theory of Robot Advisors
legal status of robo-advisorsAcademic
Assessment outcome
total 2/4 (actionability 1 + authority 1); currency unscored, so pro-rated to 3.0/6
Total2/6
Actionability1/2
Authority1/2
Currency—
Authorship & scope
Attribution (G4 evidence)
No evidence recorded for this source.
Issuer authority (evidence)
No evidence recorded for this source.
This source has not been read into a full record yet; only the screening assessment is available.
Eligibility gates
G1 · Retrievablepass
Passed in screening.
G2 · AI nexuspass
Passed in screening.
G3 · Governance nexuspass
Passed in screening.
G4 · Attributablepass
Passed in screening.
G5 · In forcepass
Passed in screening.
Scored criteria
Actionability
1/2No rationale recorded.
lawmakers need to restructure the obligor’s identification mechanism and the system of duties
Authority
1/2No rationale recorded.
Singapore Journal of Legal Studies, Mar. 2020, pp 143-164
Currency
—No rationale recorded.
Classification
Coverage topiclegal status of robo-advisors
PerspectiveAcademic
Lifecycle stageN/A cross-cutting
Layerboth
GranularityNot recorded