Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Reviewable Automated Decision-Making: A Framework for Accountable Algorithmic Systems

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2102.04201 v2 pith:SVVHNJPQ submitted 2021-01-26 cs.CY cs.AI

classification cs.CYcs.AI
keywords frameworkaccountabilitydecision-makingprocessreviewabilityalgorithmicautomateddecision
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

This paper introduces reviewability as a framework for improving the accountability of automated and algorithmic decision-making (ADM) involving machine learning. We draw on an understanding of ADM as a socio-technical process involving both human and technical elements, beginning before a decision is made and extending beyond the decision itself. While explanations and other model-centric mechanisms may assist some accountability concerns, they often provide insufficient information of these broader ADM processes for regulatory oversight and assessments of legal compliance. Reviewability involves breaking down the ADM process into technical and organisational elements to provide a systematic framework for determining the contextually appropriate record-keeping mechanisms to facilitate meaningful review - both of individual decisions and of the process as a whole. We argue that a reviewability framework, drawing on administrative law's approach to reviewing human decision-making, offers a practical way forward towards more a more holistic and legally-relevant form of accountability for ADM.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Governing Agentic AI in FinTech

    cs.CY 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Financial institutions can lose the ability to explain or reproduce agentic AI decisions even when the system is capable and seemingly stable; the paper names this a Verifiability Gap and dissects its mechanisms.

Pith tools