A Collaborative, Human-Centred Taxonomy of AI, Algorithmic, and Automation Harms
read the original abstract
This paper introduces a collaborative, human-centred taxonomy of AI, algorithmic and automation harms. We argue that existing taxonomies, while valuable, can be narrow, unclear, typically cater to practitioners and government, and often overlook the needs of the wider public. Drawing on existing taxonomies and a large repository of documented incidents, we propose a taxonomy that is clear and understandable to a broad set of audiences, as well as being flexible, extensible, and interoperable. Through iterative refinement with topic experts and crowdsourced annotation testing, we propose a taxonomy that can serve as a powerful tool for civil society organisations, educators, policymakers, product teams and the general public. By fostering a greater understanding of the real-world harms of AI and related technologies, we aim to increase understanding, empower NGOs and individuals to identify and report violations, inform policy discussions, and encourage responsible technology development and deployment.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 9 Pith papers
-
Human-Guided Harm Recovery for Computer Use Agents
A reward model trained on 1,130 human preference judgments outperforms base agents by 120 Elo points on a 50-task benchmark for recovering from harmful states in computer-use environments.
-
All Eyes on the Ranker: Participatory Auditing to Surface Blind Spots in Ranked Search Results
Participatory auditing workshops with users produce a taxonomy of epistemic, representational, infrastructural, and social impacts from ranked search results while exposing limits when neural models appear competent.
-
Designing with Tensions: Older Adults' Emotional Support-Seeking Under System-Level Constraints in Conversational AI
Interviews with 18 older adults show that AI safety interventions frequently disrupt emotional support-seeking, leading to calls for designs that respect users' pacing and preserve agency.
-
Human-Guided Harm Recovery for Computer Use Agents
Introduces harm recovery as a post-execution safeguard for computer-use agents, operationalized via a human-preference rubric, reward model, and BackBench benchmark that shows improved recovery trajectories.
-
A Closer Look at the Existing Risks of Generative AI: Mapping the Who, What, and How of Real-World Incidents
Analysis of 499 generative AI incidents shows use-related failures predominate and frequently harm non-users, producing a distinct risk profile from traditional AI.
-
Child Safety in Generative AI: An Expert-Guided and Incident-Grounded Evaluation Framework
Proposes an expert-guided and incident-grounded framework for child safety evaluation in generative AI and applies it in education to find that Llama Guard models struggle with unsafe prompts.
-
Food Noise & False Safety: A Systematic Evaluation of How LLMs Fail to Adapt to Eating Disorder Queries with Clinician Feedback
Systematic evaluation shows LLMs frequently give unsafe responses to eating disorder prompts when linguistic cues signal risk, as measured by varying prompt danger levels with clinician feedback.
-
What People See (and Miss) About Generative AI Risks: Perceptions of Failures, Risks, and Who Should Address Them
A validated survey instrument grounded in real GenAI incidents reveals public perceptions of failure modes, risks, and stakeholder responsibilities, showing potential for guiding AI literacy efforts.
-
LLM Harms: A Taxonomy and Discussion
This paper proposes a taxonomy of LLM harms in five categories and suggests mitigation strategies plus a dynamic auditing system for responsible development.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.