REVIEW 5 cited by
Closing the AI Accountability Gap: Defining an End-to-End Framework for Internal Algorithmic Auditing
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Rising concern for the societal implications of artificial intelligence systems has inspired a wave of academic and journalistic literature in which deployed systems are audited for harm by investigators from outside the organizations deploying the algorithms. However, it remains challenging for practitioners to identify the harmful repercussions of their own systems prior to deployment, and, once deployed, emergent issues can become difficult or impossible to trace back to their source. In this paper, we introduce a framework for algorithmic auditing that supports artificial intelligence system development end-to-end, to be applied throughout the internal organization development lifecycle. Each stage of the audit yields a set of documents that together form an overall audit report, drawing on an organization's values or principles to assess the fit of decisions made throughout the process. The proposed auditing framework is intended to contribute to closing the accountability gap in the development and deployment of large-scale artificial intelligence systems by embedding a robust process to ensure audit integrity.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
Governing Agentic AI in FinTech
Financial institutions can lose the ability to explain or reproduce agentic AI decisions even when the system is capable and seemingly stable; the paper names this a Verifiability Gap and dissects its mechanisms.
-
Exposure is not manifestation: measurement target and output resolution jointly determine which behavioural-faithfulness evaluator wins
Small hyperbolic models (146M–3B) report 100% creative-seed preference, 90.7% compliance-gap detection, and a selective-gating skeleton–wallpaper memory pilot as a companion-AI stack.
-
PASTA: A Scalable Framework for Multi-Policy AI Compliance Evaluation
PASTA is a model-card-based LLM pipeline that evaluates an AI system against five regulations in minutes for about $3, with expert-aligned violation and relevance scores.
-
Auditing LLM Editorial Bias in News Media Exposure
Compared with Google News, GPT-4o-Mini, Claude-3.7-Sonnet, and Gemini-2.0-Flash surface fewer unique news outlets, distribute attention more unevenly, and lean ideologically in system-specific ways.
-
Red Teaming the Mind of the Machine: A Systematic Evaluation of Prompt Injection and Jailbreak Vulnerabilities in LLMs
A claimed systematic jailbreak evaluation across four LLMs reports 69-87% attack success rates and high cross-model transferability, but provides no artifacts to support the numbers.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.