AI, Opacity, and Personal Autonomy
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Advancements in machine learning have fuelled the popularity of using AI decision algorithms in procedures such as bail hearings (Feller et al. 2016), medical diagnoses (Rajkomar et al. 2018; Esteva et al. 2019) and recruitment (Heilweil 2019, Van Esch et al. 2019). Academic articles (Floridi et al. 2018), policy texts (HLEG 2019), and popularizing books (O'Neill 2016, Eubanks 2018) alike warn that such algorithms tend to be _opaque_: they do not provide explanations for their outcomes. Building on a causal account of transparency and opacity as well as recent work on the value of causal explanation (Lombrozo 2011, Hitchcock 2012), I formulate a moral concern for opaque algorithms that is yet to receive a systematic treatment in the literature: when such algorithms are used in life-changing decisions, they can obstruct us from effectively shaping our lives according to our goals and preferences, thus undermining our autonomy. I argue that this concern deserves closer attention as it furnishes the call for transparency in algorithmic decision-making with both new tools and new challenges.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 94 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Sep 2022.
Builds on
13 of 94 references.
References · 13
- 2017Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPRcited by 1,086
- 2018A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Modelscited by 970
- 2016The Mythos of Model Interpretabilitycited by 716
- 2018Actionable Recourse in Linear Classificationcited by 327
- 2018Scalable and accurate deep learning for electronic health recordscited by 275
- 2021What Do We Want From Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)? -- A Stakeholder Perspective on XAI and a Conceptual Model Guiding Interdisciplinary XAI Researchcited by 119
- 2020Principles and Practice of Explainable Machine Learningcited by 99
- 2019Measuring the Quality of Explanations: The System Causability Scale (SCS). Comparing Human and Machine Explanationscited by 63
- 2020The Pragmatic Turn in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)cited by 53
- 2020Taking Principles Seriously: A Hybrid Approach to Value Alignmentcited by 13
- 2019Governance by Glass-Box: Implementing Transparent Moral Bounds for AI Behaviourcited by 6
- 2016Natural Language Generation enhances human decision-making with uncertain informationcited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2024AI Alignment through Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback? Contradictions and Limitationscited by 10
- 2023Automating privacy decisions -- where to draw the line?cited by 1
- 2025Autonomy by Design: Preserving Human Autonomy in AI Decision-Supportcited by 1
- 2026Examining Users' Behavioural Intention to Use OpenClaw Through the Cognition--Affect--Conation Frameworkcited by 1
- 2026Examining Users' Behavioural Intention to Use OpenClaw Through the Cognition--Affect--Conation Framework12 Mar 2026
- 2025Autonomy by Design: Preserving Human Autonomy in AI Decision-Support30 Jun 2025
- 2024AI Alignment through Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback? Contradictions and Limitations26 Jun 2024
- 2023Automating privacy decisions -- where to draw the line?15 May 2023