mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

An Empirical Exploration of Trust Dynamics in LLM Supply Chains

arXiv 2405.16310 ↗First posted 25 May 2024cs.HC cs.AIcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

With the widespread proliferation of AI systems, trust in AI is an important and timely topic to navigate. Researchers so far have largely employed a myopic view of this relationship. In particular, a limited number of relevant trustors (e.g., end-users) and trustees (i.e., AI systems) have been considered, and empirical explorations have remained in laboratory settings, potentially overlooking factors that impact human-AI relationships in the real world. In this paper, we argue for broadening the scope of studies addressing `trust in AI' by accounting for the complex and dynamic supply chains that AI systems result from. AI supply chains entail various technical artifacts that diverse individuals, organizations, and stakeholders interact with, in a variety of ways. We present insights from an in-situ, empirical study of LLM supply chains. Our work reveals additional types of trustors and trustees and new factors impacting their trust relationships. These relationships were found to be central to the development and adoption of LLMs, but they can also be the terrain for uncalibrated trust and reliance on untrustworthy LLMs. Based on these findings, we discuss the implications for research on `trust in AI'. We highlight new research opportunities and challenges concerning the appropriate study of inter-actor relationships across the supply chain and the development of calibrated trust and meaningful reliance behaviors. We also question the meaning of building trust in the LLM supply chain.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 May 2024.

Builds on

19 of 58 references.

References · 19

  1. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  2. 2020Closing the AI Accountability Gap: Defining an End-to-End Framework for Internal Algorithmic Auditingcited by 384
  3. 2021Expanding Explainability: Towards Social Transparency in AI systemscited by 124
  4. 2023Regulating ChatGPT and other Large Generative AI Modelscited by 104
  5. 2023Evaluating the Social Impact of Generative AI Systems in Systems and Societycited by 92
  6. 2023Personalisation within bounds: A risk taxonomy and policy framework for the alignment of large language models with personalised feedbackcited by 87
  7. 2021Towards a Science of Human-AI Decision Making: A Survey of Empirical Studiescited by 86
  8. 2018Towards Accountable AI: Hybrid Human-Machine Analyses for Characterizing System Failurecited by 49
  9. 2022How Different Groups Prioritize Ethical Values for Responsible AIcited by 49
  10. 2022Designing for Responsible Trust in AI Systems: A Communication Perspectivecited by 48
  11. 2023Understanding accountability in algorithmic supply chainscited by 40
  12. 2021Do Humans Trust Advice More if it Comes from AI? An Analysis of Human-AI Interactionscited by 35
7 more
  1. 2022Dislocated Accountabilities in the AI Supply Chain: Modularity and Developers' Notions of Responsibilitycited by 33
  2. 2023A Systematic Literature Review of User Trust in AI-Enabled Systems: An HCI Perspectivecited by 33
  3. 2018POTs: Protective Optimization Technologiescited by 28
  4. 2021The Sanction of Authority: Promoting Public Trust in AIcited by 19
  5. 2023Humans, AI, and Context: Understanding End-Users' Trust in a Real-World Computer Vision Applicationcited by 14
  6. 2022Trust in Human-AI Interaction: Scoping Out Models, Measures, and Methodscited by 13
  7. 2021More Similar Values, More Trust? -- the Effect of Value Similarity on Trust in Human-Agent Interactioncited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

5 papers.