Explainable AI Systems Must Be Contestable: Here's How to Make It Happen
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
- 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,297
- 2018Actionable Recourse in Linear Classificationcited by 328
- 2018The Frontiers of Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 141
- 2019Measuring the Quality of Explanations: The System Causability Scale (SCS). Comparing Human and Machine Explanationscited by 64
- 2018Interpretable to Whom? A Role-based Model for Analyzing Interpretable Machine Learning Systemscited by 48
- 2024Argumentative Large Language Models for Explainable and Contestable Claim Verificationcited by 36
- 2020Bridging the Gap: Providing Post-Hoc Symbolic Explanations for Sequential Decision-Making Problems with Inscrutable Representationscited by 32
- 2021Hard Choices in Artificial Intelligencecited by 26
- 2024From Explainable to Interactive AI: A Literature Review on Current Trends in Human-AI Interactioncited by 26
- 2024Misfitting With AI: How Blind People Verify and Contest AI Errorscited by 15
- 2024Contestable AI needs Computational Argumentationcited by 13
- 2022Towards Substantive Conceptions of Algorithmic Fairness: Normative Guidance from Equal Opportunity Doctrinescited by 10
6 more
- 2023Contestable Camera Cars: A Speculative Design Exploration of Public AI That Is Open and Responsive to Disputecited by 9
- 2024AI, Global Governance, and Digital Sovereigntycited by 4
- 2022Towards Implementing Responsible AIcited by 1
- 2022Context-dependent Explainability and Contestability for Trustworthy Medical Artificial Intelligence: Misclassification Identification of Morbidity Recognition Models in Preterm Infantscited by 1
- 2023Generating Process-Centric Explanations to Enable Contestability in Algorithmic Decision-Making: Challenges and Opportunitiescited by 1
- 2023A risk-based approach to assessing liability risk for AI-driven harms considering EU liability directivecited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.