Pith. sign in

REVIEW

A Scoping Study of Evaluation Practices for Responsible AI Tools: Steps Towards Effectiveness Evaluations

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 2401.17486 v1 pith:XQKG7WU3 submitted 2024-01-30 cs.HC

classification cs.HC
keywords toolsevaluationsdevelopmenteffectivenessresponsibledesignevaluationpractices
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Responsible design of AI systems is a shared goal across HCI and AI communities. Responsible AI (RAI) tools have been developed to support practitioners to identify, assess, and mitigate ethical issues during AI development. These tools take many forms (e.g., design playbooks, software toolkits, documentation protocols). However, research suggests that use of RAI tools is shaped by organizational contexts, raising questions about how effective such tools are in practice. To better understand how RAI tools are -- and might be -- evaluated, we conducted a qualitative analysis of 37 publications that discuss evaluations of RAI tools. We find that most evaluations focus on usability, while questions of tools' effectiveness in changing AI development are sidelined. While usability evaluations are an important approach to evaluate RAI tools, we draw on evaluation approaches from other fields to highlight developer- and community-level steps to support evaluations of RAI tools' effectiveness in shaping AI development practices and outcomes.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools