Responsible AI (RAI) has become a central concern for technology companies, regulators, and the public. How industry practitioners interpret, implement, and sustain RAI work directly shapes the design and deployment of AI systems. As empirical scholarship examining RAI practices in industry has rapidly expanded, findings are dispersed across studies that focus on different roles, organizational contexts, and interventions. This work synthesizes current knowledge through a literature review of 161 empirical studies spanning six years, each engaging industry practitioners via interviews, surveys, workshops, ethnographies, and other methods. Our synthesis reveals both meaningful progress and persistent challenges in industry RAI practice. Practitioner awareness has increased, RAI activities have become more professionalized, and interventions such as toolkits and guidelines are more widely adopted. At the same time, practitioners continue to face substantial barriers, including limited training, uneven organizational support, and a lack of interventions tailored to day-to-day work practices. By consolidating and organizing these findings, we provide a more complete account of industry RAI than any single study to date. We conclude by discussing implications for RAI researchers, practitioners seeking to adopt effective practices, and policymakers aiming to ground governance efforts in the realities of industry contexts.
Wesley Hanwen Deng, Agathe Balayn, Andrew D. Selbst et al.· 0 citations
Technologies are being rapidly developed that enable artificial intelligence (AI) systems to dynamically emulate the voice, appearance, and mannerisms of real people. Although concerns about the potential harms from such systems are widespread, there is comparatively little discussion of the conditions under which they might be used to benefit impacted parties. Recent efforts to provide a formal model of benefit represent an advance, but do not represent with sufficient clarity how such systems mediate social relationships in a way that can make a wide range of parties vulnerable to failure modes such as deception and domination. We build on and extend the Beneficent Intelligence (BI) framework from [23] to clarify the mediating role that such AI systems play, how this impacts alignment with the goals of a range of parties, and identify conditions necessary for such systems to confer meaningful benefit. Our analysis can assist developers, users, and other interested parties in better managing the risks associated with emulating technologies.
Ida Mattsson, Mai-Lee Chang, Niloofar Nikookar et al.· AI and Ethics· 0 citations
Cognitive Chain-of-Thought (CoCoT) is introduced, a reasoning framework that structures vision-language-model reasoning through three cognitively inspired stages: Perception, Situation, and Norm, showing that structuring model reasoning through cognitively grounded stages enhances interpretability and social alignment, laying the groundwork for more reliable multimodal systems.
Eunkyu Park, Wesley Hanwen Deng, Gunhee Kim et al.· 3 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
