pith. sign in

arxiv: 1810.03993 · v2 · pith:BYPFAOJVnew · submitted 2018-10-05 · 💻 cs.LG · cs.AI

Model Cards for Model Reporting

classification 💻 cs.LG cs.AI
keywords modelmodelslearningmachinecardstrainedevaluationintended
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Trained machine learning models are increasingly used to perform high-impact tasks in areas such as law enforcement, medicine, education, and employment. In order to clarify the intended use cases of machine learning models and minimize their usage in contexts for which they are not well suited, we recommend that released models be accompanied by documentation detailing their performance characteristics. In this paper, we propose a framework that we call model cards, to encourage such transparent model reporting. Model cards are short documents accompanying trained machine learning models that provide benchmarked evaluation in a variety of conditions, such as across different cultural, demographic, or phenotypic groups (e.g., race, geographic location, sex, Fitzpatrick skin type) and intersectional groups (e.g., age and race, or sex and Fitzpatrick skin type) that are relevant to the intended application domains. Model cards also disclose the context in which models are intended to be used, details of the performance evaluation procedures, and other relevant information. While we focus primarily on human-centered machine learning models in the application fields of computer vision and natural language processing, this framework can be used to document any trained machine learning model. To solidify the concept, we provide cards for two supervised models: One trained to detect smiling faces in images, and one trained to detect toxic comments in text. We propose model cards as a step towards the responsible democratization of machine learning and related AI technology, increasing transparency into how well AI technology works. We hope this work encourages those releasing trained machine learning models to accompany model releases with similar detailed evaluation numbers and other relevant documentation.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

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

  1. Positional Failures in Long-Context LLMs: A Blind Spot in Reasoning Benchmarks

    cs.CL 2026-05 conditional novelty 7.0

    Audits reveal no reasoning benchmark controls position/filler/length jointly; CRE shows LLMs drop up to 88pp on middle-position tasks at 64K context, with diagnostic probe supporting positional cause.

  2. OPT: Open Pre-trained Transformer Language Models

    cs.CL 2022-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    OPT releases open decoder-only transformers up to 175B parameters that match GPT-3 performance at one-seventh the carbon cost, along with code and training logs.

  3. Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models

    cs.CL 2023-07 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Llama 2 introduces pretrained and chat-optimized LLMs up to 70B parameters that surpass other open chat models on standard benchmarks and human evaluations of helpfulness and safety.

  4. HuggingFace's Transformers: State-of-the-art Natural Language Processing

    cs.CL 2019-10 accept novelty 6.0

    Hugging Face releases an open-source Python library that supplies a unified API and pretrained weights for major Transformer architectures used in natural language processing.

  5. Benchmarked Yet Not Measured -- Generative AI Should be Evaluated Against Real-World Utility

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Generative AI evaluation should prioritize real-world utility through stakeholder goals and longitudinal human outcome measurements instead of static benchmark performance.

  6. Benchmarked Yet Not Measured -- Generative AI Should be Evaluated Against Real-World Utility

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Generative AI evaluation must shift from static benchmark scores to measuring sustained improvements in human capabilities within specific deployment contexts.