Published on: April 12, 2026, 05:09h. 

Updated on: April 12, 2026, 05:09h.

• A recent report by UNLV reveals that few gaming companies have established AI management strategies
• While 80% of businesses employ generative AI, most lack specialized teams for governance and oversight
• Regulatory bodies voiced concerns over their limited insight into AI deployment by licensees

According to a fresh report from UNLV, many gaming organizations are harnessing artificial intelligence, yet a scant number have devised a strategy for managing it. Researchers highlight a significant disparity between the rapid adoption of AI by companies and their preparedness to regulate it effectively.

The inaugural State of AI in Gaming report, produced by the UNLV International Gaming Institute (IGI) in collaboration with financial consultancy KPMG, surveyed 83 gaming companies and 113 regulatory entities worldwide to gauge AI utilization and oversight. The study focused on four key areas: AI maturity among companies, regulatory developments, the pace of innovation, and the responsible application of AI.

“The gambling sector is at a crucial juncture regarding AI, and until now, there hasn’t been a thorough, independent framework to assess its status,” stated Kasra Ghaharian, IGI’s research director and report editor. “The State of AI in Gaming aims to bridge this gap, offering a vital resource for operators, regulators, researchers, and all stakeholders involved in the adoption and responsible integration of AI in the gaming arena.”

Weaknesses in AI Governance

One of the report’s most striking conclusions is that AI governance—encompassing the policies and procedures for managing AI—is considerably underwhelming, scoring just 30 out of 100 on the report’s index. Governance frameworks delineate who may utilize AI tools, how data should be managed, how to identify biases or errors, and procedures for unforeseen issues. The report notes that the majority of companies lack such guidelines, with only about 20% having designated personnel or teams for AI oversight.

Additionally, while over 80% of organizations utilize generative AI for various tasks—such as content creation, data analysis, or writing—fewer companies are implementing advanced “agentic” AI systems that can autonomously make decisions or take actions. Researchers suggest that this slower uptake is understandable, given the stringent regulations within the gambling sector where errors can have serious repercussions for customers and compliance.

Another critical revelation is the gap in communication between regulators and operators. Regulatory authorities express uncertainty about how companies deploy AI technologies and many admit feeling ill-equipped to supervise its use. Both parties concur that practices for responsible AI usage remain significantly underdeveloped.

UNLV plans to highlight the findings of this report at IGI’s 19th International Gambling and Risk‑Taking Conference on May 27, an event hosted every three years at the Bellagio.