# The Fall of an Algorithm: Characterizing the Dynamics Toward Abandonment

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.13802 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.13802/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 21 Apr 2024.

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [Legacy Procurement Practices Shape How U.S. Cities Govern AI: Understanding Government Employees' Practices, Challenges, and Needs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.04994/) (2024)
- [To Build or Not to Build? Factors that Lead to Non-Development or Abandonment of AI Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.28053/) (2026)
- [Slurry-as-a-Service: A Modest Proposal on Scalable Pluralistic Alignment for Nutrient Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.02420/) (2026)
- [How Formerly Incarcerated People Envision Technologies for Prison Parole](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.16513/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

As more algorithmic systems have come under scrutiny for their potential to inflict societal harms, an increasing number of organizations that hold power over harmful algorithms have chosen (or were required under the law) to abandon them. While social movements and calls to abandon harmful algorithms have emerged across application domains, little academic attention has been paid to studying abandonment as a means to mitigate algorithmic harms. In this paper, we take a first step towards conceptualizing "algorithm abandonment" as an organization's decision to stop designing, developing, or using an algorithmic system due to its (potential) harms. We conduct a thematic analysis of real-world cases of algorithm abandonment to characterize the dynamics leading to this outcome. Our analysis of 40 cases reveals that campaigns to abandon an algorithm follow a common process of six iterative phases: discovery, diagnosis, dissemination, dialogue, decision, and death, which we term the "6 D's of abandonment". In addition, we highlight key factors that facilitate (or prohibit) abandonment, which include characteristics of both the technical and social systems that the algorithm is embedded within. We discuss implications for several stakeholders, including proprietors and technologists who have the power to influence an algorithm's (dis)continued use, FAccT researchers, and policymakers.