A Blueprint for Auditing Generative AI
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The widespread use of generative AI systems is coupled with significant ethical and social challenges. As a result, policymakers, academic researchers, and social advocacy groups have all called for such systems to be audited. However, existing auditing procedures fail to address the governance challenges posed by generative AI systems, which display emergent capabilities and are adaptable to a wide range of downstream tasks. In this chapter, we address that gap by outlining a novel blueprint for how to audit such systems. Specifically, we propose a three-layered approach, whereby governance audits (of technology providers that design and disseminate generative AI systems), model audits (of generative AI systems after pre-training but prior to their release), and application audits (of applications based on top of generative AI systems) complement and inform each other. We show how audits on these three levels, when conducted in a structured and coordinated manner, can be a feasible and effective mechanism for identifying and managing some of the ethical and social risks posed by generative AI systems. That said, it is important to remain realistic about what auditing can reasonably be expected to achieve. For this reason, the chapter also discusses the limitations not only of our three-layered approach but also of the prospect of auditing generative AI systems at all. Ultimately, this chapter seeks to expand the methodological toolkit available to technology providers and policymakers who wish to analyse and evaluate generative AI systems from technical, ethical, and legal perspectives.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 0 of its 3 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jul 2024.
Builds on
0 of 3 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 3.
4 papers.
- 2026High-Risk AI Systems and the Problem of Identity in the European AI Actcited by 4
- 2025Beyond Explainability: The Case for AI Validationcited by 1
- 2026The Stability Trap: Evaluating the Reliability of LLM-Based Instruction Adherence Auditingcited by 1
- 2026A Chain Is Only as Strong as Its Weakest Link: A Scoping Review of System Integration Audits in AIcited by 0
- 2026A Chain Is Only as Strong as Its Weakest Link: A Scoping Review of System Integration Audits in AI5 Aug 2026
- 2026High-Risk AI Systems and the Problem of Identity in the European AI Act17 Apr 2026
- 2026The Stability Trap: Evaluating the Reliability of LLM-Based Instruction Adherence Auditing16 Jan 2026
- 2025Beyond Explainability: The Case for AI Validation27 May 2025