Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Foundation Model Transparency Reports

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 2402.16268 v1 pith:KZGBCOL2 submitted 2024-02-26 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CY

classification cs.LGcs.AIcs.CY
keywords transparencyfoundationreportsmodelmediamodelsreportingsocial
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Foundation models are critical digital technologies with sweeping societal impact that necessitates transparency. To codify how foundation model developers should provide transparency about the development and deployment of their models, we propose Foundation Model Transparency Reports, drawing upon the transparency reporting practices in social media. While external documentation of societal harms prompted social media transparency reports, our objective is to institutionalize transparency reporting for foundation models while the industry is still nascent. To design our reports, we identify 6 design principles given the successes and shortcomings of social media transparency reporting. To further schematize our reports, we draw upon the 100 transparency indicators from the Foundation Model Transparency Index. Given these indicators, we measure the extent to which they overlap with the transparency requirements included in six prominent government policies (e.g., the EU AI Act, the US Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy AI). Well-designed transparency reports could reduce compliance costs, in part due to overlapping regulatory requirements across different jurisdictions. We encourage foundation model developers to regularly publish transparency reports, building upon recommendations from the G7 and the White House.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. User Privacy and Large Language Models: An Analysis of Frontier Developers' Privacy Policies

    cs.CY 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    All six leading U.S. AI chatbot developers, as of May 2025, appear to train their models on users' chat data by default, often without clear opt-out options.

  2. Controlling Context: Generative AI at Work in Integrated Circuit Design and Other High-Precision Domains

    cs.HC 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Qualitative interviews with 17 IC-design engineers show that the main difficulty with generative AI tools is not output accuracy but context control, supporting a shift toward interactive context-steering features.

Pith tools