Operationalizing the Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights: Recommendations for Practitioners, Researchers, and Policy Makers
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
As Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools are increasingly employed in diverse real-world applications, there has been significant interest in regulating these tools. To this end, several regulatory frameworks have been introduced by different countries worldwide. For example, the European Union recently passed the AI Act, the White House issued an Executive Order on safe, secure, and trustworthy AI, and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy issued the Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights (AI BoR). Many of these frameworks emphasize the need for auditing and improving the trustworthiness of AI tools, underscoring the importance of safety, privacy, explainability, fairness, and human fallback options. Although these regulatory frameworks highlight the necessity of enforcement, practitioners often lack detailed guidance on implementing them. Furthermore, the extensive research on operationalizing each of these aspects is frequently buried in technical papers that are difficult for practitioners to parse. In this write-up, we address this shortcoming by providing an accessible overview of existing literature related to operationalizing regulatory principles. We provide easy-to-understand summaries of state-of-the-art literature and highlight various gaps that exist between regulatory guidelines and existing AI research, including the trade-offs that emerge during operationalization. We hope that this work not only serves as a starting point for practitioners interested in learning more about operationalizing the regulatory guidelines outlined in the Blueprint for an AI BoR but also provides researchers with a list of critical open problems and gaps between regulations and state-of-the-art AI research. Finally, we note that this is a working paper and we invite feedback in line with the purpose of this document as described in the introduction.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 47 of its 80 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Jul 2024.
Builds on
47 of 80 references.
References · 47
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
- 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,160
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
- 2016Deep Learning with Differential Privacycited by 2,682
- 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,221
- 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,144
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
- 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,371
35 more
- 2019Certified Adversarial Robustness via Randomized Smoothingcited by 1,324
- 2018Sanity Checks for Saliency Mapscited by 1,149
- 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,130
- 2017SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noisecited by 1,097
- 2017Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPRcited by 1,086
- 2023Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Promptingcited by 1,081
- 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,068
- 2019Machine Unlearningcited by 1,020
- 2017Counterfactual Fairnesscited by 802
- 2019Generalization through Memorization: Nearest Neighbor Language Modelscited by 788
- 2023Siren's Song in the AI Ocean: A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Modelscited by 695
- 2017Interpretable Explanations of Black Boxes by Meaningful Perturbationcited by 611
- 2018A Reductions Approach to Fair Classificationcited by 585
- 2018Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learningcited by 508
- 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 440
- 2020Closing the AI Accountability Gap: Defining an End-to-End Framework for Internal Algorithmic Auditingcited by 380
- 2021Interpretable Machine Learning: Fundamental Principles and 10 Grand Challengescited by 364
- 2023Studying Large Language Model Generalization with Influence Functionscited by 311
- 2023Stable Bias: Analyzing Societal Representations in Diffusion Modelscited by 225
- 2019Explanations can be manipulated and geometry is to blamecited by 215
- 2022Datamodels: Predicting Predictions from Training Datacited by 186
- 2017Formal Guarantees on the Robustness of a Classifier against Adversarial Manipulationcited by 182
- 2016Grad-CAM: Why did you say that?cited by 159
- 2024Interpreting CLIP with Sparse Linear Concept Embeddings (SpLiCE)cited by 116
- 2019"How do I fool you?": Manipulating User Trust via Misleading Black Box Explanationscited by 111
- 2021Do Language Models Have Beliefs? Methods for Detecting, Updating, and Visualizing Model Beliefscited by 79
- 2022Which Explanation Should I Choose? A Function Approximation Perspective to Characterizing Post Hoc Explanationscited by 77
- 2019Distributionally Robust Optimization: A Reviewcited by 75
- 2020Human Factors in Model Interpretability: Industry Practices, Challenges, and Needscited by 73
- 2020Selective Classification Can Magnify Disparities Across Groupscited by 35
- 2021Representation Matters: Assessing the Importance of Subgroup Allocations in Training Datacited by 31
- 2020Bridging Machine Learning and Mechanism Design towards Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 30
- 2021Stakeholder Participation in AI: Beyond "Add Diverse Stakeholders and Stir"cited by 26
- 2023Fair Machine Unlearning: Data Removal while Mitigating Disparitiescited by 25
- 2018Simplicity Creates Inequity: Implications for Fairness, Stereotypes, and Interpretabilitycited by 16
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2.
2 papers.