Who is Responsible When AI Fails? Mapping Causes, Entities, and Consequences of AI Privacy and Ethical Incidents
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The rapid growth of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has raised major privacy and ethical concerns. However, existing AI incident taxonomies and guidelines lack grounding in real-world cases, limiting their effectiveness for prevention and mitigation. We analyzed 202 real-world AI privacy and ethical incidents to develop a taxonomy that classifies them across AI lifecycle stages and captures contributing factors, including causes, responsible entities, sources of disclosure, and impacts. Our findings reveal widespread harms from poor organizational decisions and legal non-compliance, limited corrective interventions, and rare reporting from AI developers and adopting entities. Our taxonomy offers a structured approach for systematic incident reporting and emphasizes the weaknesses of current AI governance frameworks. Our findings provide actionable guidance for policymakers and practitioners to strengthen user protections, develop targeted AI policies, enhance reporting practices, and foster responsible AI governance and innovation, especially in contexts such as social media and child protection.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 244 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Mar 2025.
Builds on
25 of 244 references.
References · 25
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,975
- 2021Scaling Language Models: Methods, Analysis & Insights from Training Gophercited by 1,202
- 2020StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language modelscited by 924
- 2016Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biasescited by 901
- 2020The State and Fate of Linguistic Diversity and Inclusion in the NLP Worldcited by 798
- 2018Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?cited by 262
- 2021Challenges in Detoxifying Language Modelscited by 169
- 2023Sociotechnical Safety Evaluation of Generative AI Systemscited by 157
- 2022Sociotechnical Harms of Algorithmic Systems: Scoping a Taxonomy for Harm Reductioncited by 138
- 2019Artificial Intelligence: the global landscape of ethics guidelinescited by 107
- 2020Preventing Repeated Real World AI Failures by Cataloging Incidents: The AI Incident Databasecited by 96
13 more
- 2022The Fallacy of AI Functionalitycited by 88
- 2019Understanding artificial intelligence ethics and safetycited by 68
- 2024Risk Taxonomy, Mitigation, and Assessment Benchmarks of Large Language Model Systemscited by 66
- 2023Deepfakes, Phrenology, Surveillance, and More! A Taxonomy of AI Privacy Riskscited by 31
- 2021Generating Fake Cyber Threat Intelligence Using Transformer-Based Modelscited by 29
- 2023The impact of generative artificial intelligence on socioeconomic inequalities and policy makingcited by 20
- 2024A Collaborative, Human-Centred Taxonomy of AI, Algorithmic, and Automation Harmscited by 19
- 2024Not My Voice! A Taxonomy of Ethical and Safety Harms of Speech Generatorscited by 18
- 2024Sora OpenAI's Prelude: Social Media Perspectives on Sora OpenAI and the Future of AI Video Generationcited by 8
- 2025Atlas of AI Risks: Enhancing Public Understanding of AI Riskscited by 7
- 2024The Great AI Witch Hunt: Reviewers Perception and (Mis)Conception of Generative AI in Research Writingcited by 6
- 2022A Survey of the Potential Long-term Impacts of AIcited by 3
- 2025Privacy in Immersive Extended Reality: Exploring User Perceptions, Concerns, and Coping Strategiescited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.