# Trustworthy AI in practice: an analysis of practitioners' needs and challenges

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.12135 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.12135/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 6 of its 48 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 15 May 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.07874/) (2017)
- ["Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.04938/) (2016)
- [Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.07524/) (2016)
- [Fairness and Accountability Design Needs for Algorithmic Support in High-Stakes Public Sector Decision-Making](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.01029/) (2018)
- [A Rapid Review of Responsible AI frameworks: How to guide the development of ethical AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05003/) (2023)
- [MLOps Spanning Whole Machine Learning Life Cycle: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.07296/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [Towards More Trustworthy and Interpretable LLMs for Code through Syntax-Grounded Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.08983/) (2024)
- [Mapping the Trust Terrain: LLMs in Software Engineering -- Insights and Perspectives](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.13793/) (2025)
- [Towards User-Centred Design of AI-Assisted Decision-Making in Law Enforcement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.17393/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Recently, there has been growing attention on behalf of both academic and practice communities towards the ability of Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems to operate responsibly and ethically. As a result, a plethora of frameworks and guidelines have appeared to support practitioners in implementing Trustworthy AI applications (TAI). However, little research has been done to investigate whether such frameworks are being used and how. In this work, we study the vision AI practitioners have on TAI principles, how they address them, and what they would like to have - in terms of tools, knowledge, or guidelines - when they attempt to incorporate such principles into the systems they develop. Through a survey and semi-structured interviews, we systematically investigated practitioners' challenges and needs in developing TAI systems. Based on these practical findings, we highlight recommendations to help AI practitioners develop Trustworthy AI applications.