Closing the AI Accountability Gap: Defining an End-to-End Framework for Internal Algorithmic Auditing
2020/01/03 by Inioluwa Deborah Raji, Andrew Smart, Raji, Inioluwa Deborah +15 · 1 voice · 161 citations
Computer Science · Mathematics · Social Sciences · #Accountability #Accounting #Audit #Blockchain Technology Applications and Security #Business #Closing (real estate) #Computer science #Computer security #Computers and Society (cs.CY) #Dead end #End-to-end principle #Ethics and Social Impacts of AI #Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) #FOS: Computer and information sciences #Finance #Flow (mathematics) #Internal audit #Law #Mathematics #Political science #Process management #cs.CY
paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.00973
published in arXiv (Cornell University) (Cornell University) · Accepted to ACM FAT* (Fariness, Accountability and Transparency) conference 2020. Full workable templates for the documents of the SMACTR framework presented in the paper can be found here https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1GWlq8qGZXb2lNHxWBuo2wl-rlHsjNPM0?usp=sharing
arxiv created 2020/01/03 · openalex publication_date 2020/01/03 · arxiv published 2020/01/03 · arxiv updated 2020/01/07 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
Abstract
Rising concern for the societal implications of artificial intelligence systems has inspired a wave of academic and journalistic literature in which deployed systems are audited for harm by investigators from outside the organizations deploying the algorithms. However, it remains challenging for practitioners to identify the harmful repercussions of their own systems prior to deployment, and, once deployed, emergent issues can become difficult or impossible to trace back to their source. In this paper, we introduce a framework for algorithmic auditing that supports artificial intelligence system development end-to-end, to be applied throughout the internal organization development lifecycle. Each stage of the audit yields a set of documents that together form an overall audit report, drawing on an organization's values or principles to assess the fit of decisions made throughout the process. The proposed auditing framework is intended to contribute to closing the accountability gap in the development and deployment of large-scale artificial intelligence systems by embedding a robust process to ensure audit integrity.
Citations
Cited by
- Security and Privacy in Agentic AI: Grand Challenges and Future Directions
- Toward Secure and Compliant AI: Organizational Standards and Protocols for NLP Model Lifecycle Management
- Stability of AI Governance Systems: A Coupled Dynamics Model of Public Trust and Social Disruptions
- Beyond Context: Large Language Models' Failure to Grasp Users' Intent
- Evaluation of AI Ethics Tools in Language Models: A Developers' Perspective Case Stud
- Insured Agents: A Decentralized Trust Insurance Mechanism for Agentic Economy
- Epistemic Substitution: How Grokipedia's AI-Generated Encyclopedia Restructures Authority
- Who Evaluates AI's Social Impacts? Mapping Coverage and Gaps in First and Third Party Evaluations
- Fair and Explainable Credit-Scoring under Concept Drift: Adaptive Explanation Frameworks for Evolving Populations
- EvalCards: A Framework for Standardized Evaluation Reporting
- Trustworthy Quantum Machine Learning: A Roadmap for Reliability, Robustness, and Security in the NISQ Era
- Validity Is What You Need
- Auditing LLM Editorial Bias in News Media Exposure
- Accountability in Government Use of AI : Citizen Concerns and Preferences
- Why Public Service AI Governance Frameworks Risk Failing in the Age of General-Purpose AI: Lessons from Policing
- The Human Utility Factor: A Computable Welfare Metric That Reframes AI Governance as a Constrained Optimisation Problem
- Metacognition Should Be the Scientific Framework for Bounded and Effective Self-Governance in Generative AI
- Exploring the Intersection of AI, Language, and Law: A Bibliometric Analysis
- Epistemic welfare and public service media's algorithmic recommender systems: A theoretical framework, operationalization and relevance for governance
- Black Box Absorption: LLMs Undermining Innovative Ideas
- AI of the People, by the People, for the People: A Social Choice Approach to Collective Control of Artificial Intelligence
- Measuring What Matters: The AI Pluralism Index
- A global log for medical AI
- "I Don't Think RAI Applies to My Model'' -- Engaging Non-champions with Sticky Stories for Responsible AI Work
- Does AI Coaching Prepare us for Workplace Negotiations?
- Holding AI to Account: Challenges for the Delivery of Trustworthy AI in Healthcare
- Scaling, Lock-In, and Proxy Compliance: A Political Economy of Responsible AI
- Bureaucratic Silences: What the Canadian AI Register Reveals, Omits, and Obscures
- Public acceptance of various ways to use and treat AI: A predictive moral framework
- From moral panic to pragmatic governance: reframing AI’s societal impacts in employment, education, and ethics
- Right-to-Override for Critical Urban Control Systems: A Deliberative Audit Method for Buildings, Power, and Transport
- Collective Recourse for Generative Urban Visualizations
- AI Harmonics: a human-centric and harms severity-adaptive AI risk assessment framework
- Audits Under Resource, Data, and Access Constraints: Scaling Laws For Less Discriminatory Alternatives
- "She was useful, but a bit too optimistic": Augmenting Design with Interactive Virtual Personas
- What Makes AI Applications Acceptable or Unacceptable? A Predictive Moral Framework
- Bridging Research Gaps Between Academic Research and Legal Investigations of Algorithmic Discrimination
- The AI-Fraud Diamond: A Novel Lens for Auditing Algorithmic Deception
- Bias is a Math Problem, AI Bias is a Technical Problem: 10-year Literature Review of AI/LLM Bias Research Reveals Narrow [Gender-Centric] Conceptions of 'Bias', and Academia-Industry Gap
- TechOps: Technical Documentation Templates for the AI Act
- Towards Transparent Ethical AI: A Roadmap for Trustworthy Robotic Systems
- A Survey on Data Security in Large Language Models
- Mapping Stakeholder Needs to Multi-Sided Fairness in Candidate Recommendation for Algorithmic Hiring
- Exposing the Illusion of Fairness: Auditing Vulnerabilities to Distributional Manipulation Attacks
- The Algorithmic Imprint
- Ethics as a service: a pragmatic operationalisation of AI Ethics
- Addressing Pitfalls in Auditing Practices of Automatic Speech Recognition Technologies: A Case Study of People with Aphasia
- The Engineer's Dilemma: A Review of Establishing a Legal Framework for Integrating Machine Learning in Construction by Navigating Precedents and Industry Expectations
- Pushing the Boundaries of Immersion and Storytelling: A Technical Review of Unreal Engine
- Attestable Audits: Verifiable AI Safety Benchmarks Using Trusted Execution Environments
- Accountability of Robust and Reliable AI-Enabled Systems: A Preliminary Study and Roadmap
- Advances in LLMs with Focus on Reasoning, Adaptability, Efficiency and Ethics
- What Comes After Harm? Mapping Reparative Actions in AI through Justice Frameworks
- Red Teaming the Mind of the Machine: A Systematic Evaluation of Prompt Injection and Jailbreak Vulnerabilities in LLMs
- AI Data Development: A Scorecard for the System Card Framework
- Locating Risk: Task Designers and the Challenge of Risk Disclosure in RAI Content Work
- The Steganographic Potentials of Language Models
- Toward Effective AI Governance: A Review of Principles
- Position is Power: System Prompts as a Mechanism of Bias in Large Language Models (LLMs)
- Can we Debias Social Stereotypes in AI-Generated Images? Examining Text-to-Image Outputs and User Perceptions
- What Is AI Safety? What Do We Want It to Be?
- MonitrLLM: A Community-Centered Evaluation Infrastructure for Large Language Models
- A Blueprint for AI-Driven Software Quality: Integrating LLMs with Established Standards
- Stronger Together: on the Articulation of Ethical Charters, Legal Tools, and Technical Documentation in ML
- Opacity as a Feature, Not a Flaw: The LoBOX Governance Ethic for Role-Sensitive Explainability and Institutional Trust in AI
- Toward Adaptive Categories: Dimensional Governance for Agentic AI
- The Accountability Paradox: How Platform API Restrictions Undermine AI Transparency Mandates
- AI LEGO: Scaffolding Cross-Functional Collaboration in Industrial Responsible AI Practices during Early Design Stages
- The Governance Inversion Hypothesis: Why More AI Regulation May Produce Less Organisational Control
- LibVulnWatch: A Deep Assessment Agent System and Leaderboard for Uncovering Hidden Vulnerabilities in Open-Source AI Libraries
- The Value of Disagreement in AI Design, Evaluation, and Alignment
- Third-party compliance reviews for frontier AI safety frameworks
- Emotions in Artificial Intelligence
- Fairness Audits of Institutional Risk Models in Deployed ML Pipelines
- AI Alignment and Fiduciary Obligation
- Governable Individuals: An Identity Layer for Embodied Agents That Keep Learning
- The Aftermath of DrawEduMath: Vision Language Models Underperform with Struggling Students and Misdiagnose Errors
- LLM Ethics Benchmark: A Three-Dimensional Assessment System for Evaluating Moral Reasoning in Large Language Models
- AI Evaluation Should Require Standardized Item-Level Data Releases
- Long-Tail Knowledge in Large Language Models: Taxonomy, Mechanisms, Interventions and Implications
- An LLM-Powered Semantic Alignment Framework for Journal Recommendation
- Two Means to an End Goal: Connecting Explainability and Contestability in the Regulation of Public Sector AI
- When Life Gives You AI, Will You Turn It Into A Market for Lemons? Understanding How Information Asymmetries About AI System Capabilities Affect Market Outcomes and Adoption
- Accountability Asymmetry and Structural Trust in Autonomous AI Systems
- Towards AI Accountability Infrastructure: Gaps and Opportunities in AI Audit Tooling
- Responsible artificial intelligence governance: A review and research framework
- Audit Cards: Contextualizing AI Evaluations
- A Taxonomy of Questions for Critical Reflection in Machine-Assisted Decision-Making
- Authoritarian Recursions: How Fiction, History, and AI Reinforce Control in Education, Warfare, and Discourse
Discussions
Related