Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Applying Transparency in Artificial Intelligence based Personalization 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 2004.00935 v2 pith:2YYZLJYF submitted 2020-04-02 cs.CY cs.HCcs.LG

Applying Transparency in Artificial Intelligence based Personalization Systems

classification cs.CY cs.HCcs.LG
keywords transparencypersonalizationsystemsuserschecklistalgorithmicartificialbest
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Artificial Intelligence based systems increasingly use personalization to provide users with relevant content, products, and solutions. Personalization is intended to support users and address their respective needs and preferences. However, users are becoming increasingly vulnerable to online manipulation due to algorithmic advancements and lack of transparency. Such manipulation decreases users' levels of trust, autonomy, and satisfaction concerning the systems with which they interact. Increasing transparency is an important goal for personalization based systems. Unfortunately, system designers lack guidance in assessing and implementing transparency in their developed systems. In this work we combine insights from technology ethics and computer science to generate a list of transparency best practices for machine generated personalization. Based on these best practices, we develop a checklist to be used by designers wishing to evaluate and increase the transparency of their algorithmic systems. Adopting a designer perspective, we apply the checklist to prominent online services and discuss its advantages and shortcomings. We encourage researchers to adopt the checklist in various environments and to work towards a consensus-based tool for measuring transparency in the personalization community.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. AI Transparency: Governance Compliance or Stakeholder Requirements?

    cs.CY 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Empirical review of 92 Australian AI transparency statements finds widespread structural compliance but weak calibration to high-risk, low-control stakeholders, framed as a Transparency Illusion.