Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Generating Process-Centric Explanations to Enable Contestability in Algorithmic Decision-Making: Challenges and Opportunities

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 2305.00739 v1 pith:K6I5CUEX submitted 2023-05-01 cs.HC

classification cs.HC
keywords explanationsalgorithmicdecisionprocess-centriccapturedchallengescontestabilitydecision-making
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Human-AI decision making is becoming increasingly ubiquitous, and explanations have been proposed to facilitate better Human-AI interactions. Recent research has investigated the positive impact of explanations on decision subjects' fairness perceptions in algorithmic decision-making. Despite these advances, most studies have captured the effect of explanations in isolation, considering explanations as ends in themselves, and reducing them to technical solutions provided through XAI methodologies. In this vision paper, we argue that the effect of explanations on fairness perceptions should rather be captured in relation to decision subjects' right to contest such decisions. Since contestable AI systems are open to human intervention throughout their lifecycle, contestability requires explanations that go beyond outcomes and also capture the rationales that led to the development and deployment of the algorithmic system in the first place. We refer to such explanations as process-centric explanations. In this work, we introduce the notion of process-centric explanations and describe some of the main challenges and research opportunities for generating and evaluating such explanations.

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. Explainable AI Systems Must Be Contestable: Here's How to Make It Happen

    cs.CY 2025-06 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    The paper proposes a definition of contestability for AI, a four-dimension taxonomy, and a weighted Contestability Assessment Score, applied to three illustrative case studies.

Pith tools