arXiv study finds end-users rate AI transparency as less useful than builders and policymakers
A new paper on arXiv examines how different groups—end-users, AI builders, and policymakers—perceive generative AI transparency. Based on a global survey of 400 participants and a focus group with underserved end-users, the study reveals a disconnect: only 28% of end-users say current transparency practices meet their needs, compared to 53% of builders and 49% of policymakers. The research…
Key points
- Only 28% of end-users say current AI transparency practices reflect their needs, vs. 53% of builders and 49% of policymakers
- Survey of 400 participants and a focus group with underserved end-users underpin the findings
- Study calls for context-specific transparency solutions, not static documentation or disclosure alone
The authors argue for pluralistic transparency infrastructures that adapt to different stakeholder demands. Their findings challenge the idea of a one-size-fits-all approach, emphasizing that power dynamics influence what transparency features are prioritized and who benefits from them.
The headline, key points and digest above were generated by Digest AI's editorial model from the linked sources. Automated summaries can contain errors: the sources are the record. Spotted a mistake? Tell us. Published by Martin K., who runs Digest AI and handles corrections.
More in Policy & Regulation
All →- Judge dismisses direct copyright claim against Anthropic co‑founder Dario Amodei · 1 src
- Democratic wins in Texas, Georgia, Ohio and Pennsylvania expose 50% of proposed US AI data center additions to greater scrutiny · 8 src
- OpenAI avoids criticizing China chip sales to keep Nvidia as supplier · 1 src
- Reveal’s Onna now collects Claude Enterprise prompts and responses for e-discovery · 1 src
- Democratic sweep of US Congress drags Asian tech stocks · 4 src
Comments
via GitHub Discussions