mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Explainable AI Systems Must Be Contestable: Here's How to Make It Happen

arXiv 2506.01662 ↗First posted 2 Jun 2025cs.CY cs.AI cs.LGcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

As AI regulations around the world intensify their focus on system safety, contestability has become a mandatory, yet ill-defined, safeguard. In XAI, "contestability" remains an empty promise: no formal definition exists, no algorithm guarantees it, and practitioners lack concrete guidance to satisfy regulatory requirements. Grounded in a systematic literature review, this paper presents the first rigorous formal definition of contestability in explainable AI, directly aligned with stakeholder requirements and regulatory mandates. We introduce a modular framework of by-design and post-hoc mechanisms spanning human-centered interfaces, technical architectures, legal processes, and organizational workflows. To operationalize our framework, we propose the Contestability Assessment Scale, a composite metric built on more than twenty quantitative criteria. Through multiple case studies across diverse application domains, we reveal where state-of-the-art systems fall short and show how our framework drives targeted improvements. By converting contestability from regulatory theory into a practical framework, our work equips practitioners with the tools to embed genuine recourse and accountability into AI systems.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jun 2025.

Builds on

18 of 58 references.

References · 18

  1. 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,297
  2. 2018Actionable Recourse in Linear Classificationcited by 328
  3. 2018The Frontiers of Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 141
  4. 2019Measuring the Quality of Explanations: The System Causability Scale (SCS). Comparing Human and Machine Explanationscited by 64
  5. 2018Interpretable to Whom? A Role-based Model for Analyzing Interpretable Machine Learning Systemscited by 48
  6. 2024Argumentative Large Language Models for Explainable and Contestable Claim Verificationcited by 36
  7. 2020Bridging the Gap: Providing Post-Hoc Symbolic Explanations for Sequential Decision-Making Problems with Inscrutable Representationscited by 32
  8. 2021Hard Choices in Artificial Intelligencecited by 26
  9. 2024From Explainable to Interactive AI: A Literature Review on Current Trends in Human-AI Interactioncited by 26
  10. 2024Misfitting With AI: How Blind People Verify and Contest AI Errorscited by 15
  11. 2024Contestable AI needs Computational Argumentationcited by 13
  12. 2022Towards Substantive Conceptions of Algorithmic Fairness: Normative Guidance from Equal Opportunity Doctrinescited by 10
6 more
  1. 2023Contestable Camera Cars: A Speculative Design Exploration of Public AI That Is Open and Responsive to Disputecited by 9
  2. 2024AI, Global Governance, and Digital Sovereigntycited by 4
  3. 2022Towards Implementing Responsible AIcited by 1
  4. 2022Context-dependent Explainability and Contestability for Trustworthy Medical Artificial Intelligence: Misclassification Identification of Morbidity Recognition Models in Preterm Infantscited by 1
  5. 2023Generating Process-Centric Explanations to Enable Contestability in Algorithmic Decision-Making: Challenges and Opportunitiescited by 1
  6. 2023A risk-based approach to assessing liability risk for AI-driven harms considering EU liability directivecited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.