mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The Sanction of Authority: Promoting Public Trust in AI

arXiv 2102.04221 ↗First posted 22 Jan 2021cs.CYcited by 19

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Trusted AI literature to date has focused on the trust needs of users who knowingly interact with discrete AIs. Conspicuously absent from the literature is a rigorous treatment of public trust in AI. We argue that public distrust of AI originates from the under-development of a regulatory ecosystem that would guarantee the trustworthiness of the AIs that pervade society. Drawing from structuration theory and literature on institutional trust, we offer a model of public trust in AI that differs starkly from models driving Trusted AI efforts. This model provides a theoretical scaffolding for Trusted AI research which underscores the need to develop nothing less than a comprehensive and visibly functioning regulatory ecosystem. We elaborate the pivotal role of externally auditable AI documentation within this model and the work to be done to ensure it is effective, and outline a number of actions that would promote public trust in AI. We discuss how existing efforts to develop AI documentation within organizations -- both to inform potential adopters of AI components and support the deliberations of risk and ethics review boards -- is necessary but insufficient assurance of the trustworthiness of AI. We argue that being accountable to the public in ways that earn their trust, through elaborating rules for AI and developing resources for enforcing these rules, is what will ultimately make AI trustworthy enough to be woven into the fabric of our society.

Key facts. Cited by 19 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 22 Jan 2021.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 2; 2023: 6; 2024: 5; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

19 papers.

Sort:

  1. 2021Trustworthy AI: From Principles to Practicescited by 206
  2. 2022Designing for Responsible Trust in AI Systems: A Communication Perspectivecited by 48
  3. 2022Investigating Explainability of Generative AI for Code through Scenario-based Designcited by 47
  4. 2024Trust in AI: Progress, Challenges, and Future Directionscited by 35
  5. 2023Charting the Sociotechnical Gap in Explainable AI: A Framework to Address the Gap in XAIcited by 33
  6. 2023"It Felt Like Having a Second Mind": Investigating Human-AI Co-creativity in Prewriting with Large Language Modelscited by 15
  7. 2023Humans, AI, and Context: Understanding End-Users' Trust in a Real-World Computer Vision Applicationcited by 14
  8. 2024Towards More Trustworthy and Interpretable LLMs for Code through Syntax-Grounded Explanationscited by 10
  9. 2025Understanding AI Trustworthiness: A Scoping Review of AIES & FAccT Articlescited by 6
  10. 2023A Systematic Literature Review of Human-Centered, Ethical, and Responsible AIcited by 5
  11. 2023Certification Labels for Trustworthy AI: Insights From an Empirical Mixed-Method Studycited by 5
  12. 2024(Un)making AI Magic: a Design Taxonomycited by 5
7 more
  1. 2024An Empirical Exploration of Trust Dynamics in LLM Supply Chainscited by 5
  2. 2021Fair Decision-Making for Food Inspectionscited by 1
  3. 2024Pragmatic auditing: a pilot-driven approach for auditing Machine Learning systemscited by 1
  4. 2026PASTA: A Scalable Framework for Multi-Policy AI Compliance Evaluationcited by 1
  5. 2023Fiduciary Responsibility: Facilitating Public Trust in Automated Decision Makingcited by 0
  6. 2025Mapping the Trust Terrain: LLMs in Software Engineering -- Insights and Perspectivescited by 0
  7. 2026AI Adoption Across a Multinational Workforce: Sociotechnical Conditions for GenAI Acceptance in Human Resourcescited by 0