Practices for Engineering Trustworthy Machine Learning Applications
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Following the recent surge in adoption of machine learning (ML), the negative impact that improper use of ML can have on users and society is now also widely recognised. To address this issue, policy makers and other stakeholders, such as the European Commission or NIST, have proposed high-level guidelines aiming to promote trustworthy ML (i.e., lawful, ethical and robust). However, these guidelines do not specify actions to be taken by those involved in building ML systems. In this paper, we argue that guidelines related to the development of trustworthy ML can be translated to operational practices, and should become part of the ML development life cycle. Towards this goal, we ran a multi-vocal literature review, and mined operational practices from white and grey literature. Moreover, we launched a global survey to measure practice adoption and the effects of these practices. In total, we identified 14 new practices, and used them to complement an existing catalogue of ML engineering practices. Initial analysis of the survey results reveals that so far, practice adoption for trustworthy ML is relatively low. In particular, practices related to assuring security of ML components have very low adoption. Other practices enjoy slightly larger adoption, such as providing explanations to users. Our extended practice catalogue can be used by ML development teams to bridge the gap between high-level guidelines and actual development of trustworthy ML systems; it is open for review and contribution
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 1 Mar 2021.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 1; 2024: 4; 2025: 1.
8 papers.
- 2023A Meta-Summary of Challenges in Building Products with ML Components -- Collecting Experiences from 4758+ Practitionerscited by 22
- 2024Towards More Trustworthy and Interpretable LLMs for Code through Syntax-Grounded Explanationscited by 10
- 2022"Project smells" -- Experiences in Analysing the Software Quality of ML Projects with mllintcited by 2
- 2024U-Trustworthy Models.Reliability, Competence, and Confidence in Decision-Makingcited by 1
- 2024A Mathematical Model of the Hidden Feedback Loop Effect in Machine Learning Systemscited by 1
- 2022Empowering the trustworthiness of ML-based critical systems through engineering activitiescited by 0
- 2024Perspective of Software Engineering Researchers on Machine Learning Practices Regarding Research, Review, and Educationcited by 0
- 2025Mapping the Trust Terrain: LLMs in Software Engineering -- Insights and Perspectivescited by 0
- 2025Mapping the Trust Terrain: LLMs in Software Engineering -- Insights and Perspectives18 Mar 2025
- 2024Perspective of Software Engineering Researchers on Machine Learning Practices Regarding Research, Review, and Education28 Nov 2024
- 2024Towards More Trustworthy and Interpretable LLMs for Code through Syntax-Grounded Explanations12 Jul 2024
- 2024A Mathematical Model of the Hidden Feedback Loop Effect in Machine Learning Systems4 May 2024
- 2024U-Trustworthy Models.Reliability, Competence, and Confidence in Decision-Making4 Jan 2024
- 2023A Meta-Summary of Challenges in Building Products with ML Components -- Collecting Experiences from 4758+ Practitioners31 Mar 2023
- 2022Empowering the trustworthiness of ML-based critical systems through engineering activities30 Sep 2022
- 2022"Project smells" -- Experiences in Analysing the Software Quality of ML Projects with mllint20 Jan 2022