mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Measurement as governance in and for responsible AI

arXiv 2109.05658 ↗First posted 13 Sep 2021cs.CYcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Measurement of social phenomena is everywhere, unavoidably, in sociotechnical systems. This is not (only) an academic point: Fairness-related harms emerge when there is a mismatch in the measurement process between the thing we purport to be measuring and the thing we actually measure. However, the measurement process -- where social, cultural, and political values are implicitly encoded in sociotechnical systems -- is almost always obscured. Furthermore, this obscured process is where important governance decisions are encoded: governance about which systems are fair, which individuals belong in which categories, and so on. We can then use the language of measurement, and the tools of construct validity and reliability, to uncover hidden governance decisions. In particular, we highlight two types of construct validity, content validity and consequential validity, that are useful to elicit and characterize the feedback loops between the measurement, social construction, and enforcement of social categories. We then explore the constructs of fairness, robustness, and responsibility in the context of governance in and for responsible AI. Together, these perspectives help us unpack how measurement acts as a hidden governance process in sociotechnical systems. Understanding measurement as governance supports a richer understanding of the governance processes already happening in AI -- responsible or otherwise -- revealing paths to more effective interventions.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 13 Sep 2021.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 1; 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

8 papers.