Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Legally-Informed Explainable AI

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 2504.10708 v1 pith:3SZLJWJO submitted 2025-04-14 cs.HC

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

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Explanations for artificial intelligence (AI) systems are intended to support the people who are impacted by AI systems in high-stakes decision-making environments, such as doctors, patients, teachers, students, housing applicants, and many others. To protect people and support the responsible development of AI, explanations need to be actionable--helping people take pragmatic action in response to an AI system--and contestable--enabling people to push back against an AI system and its determinations. For many high-stakes domains, such as healthcare, education, and finance, the sociotechnical environment includes significant legal implications that impact how people use AI explanations. For example, physicians who use AI decision support systems may need information on how accepting or rejecting an AI determination will protect them from lawsuits or help them advocate for their patients. In this paper, we make the case for Legally-Informed Explainable AI, responding to the need to integrate and design for legal considerations when creating AI explanations. We describe three stakeholder groups with different informational and actionability needs, and provide practical recommendations to tackle design challenges around the design of explainable AI systems that incorporate legal considerations.

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. Heart2Mind: Human-Centered Contestable Psychiatric Disorder Diagnosis System using Wearable ECG Monitors

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A wearable-ECG system with a time-frequency transformer and a contestable chatbot reports 91.7% accuracy for separating schizophrenia/bipolar patients from controls on a 60-person dataset.

Pith tools