Dead Zone of Accountability: Why Social Claims in Machine Learning Research Should Be Articulated and Defended
Fuente:
arXiv
Gespeichert in:
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Veröffentlicht: |
2025
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| _version_ | 1866916901148426240 |
|---|---|
| author | Kou, Tianqi Calacci, Dana Lin, Cindy |
| author_facet | Kou, Tianqi Calacci, Dana Lin, Cindy |
| contents | Many Machine Learning research studies use language that describes potential social benefits or technical affordances of new methods and technologies. Such language, which we call "social claims", can help garner substantial resources and influence for those involved in ML research and technology production. However, there exists a gap between social claims and reality (the claim-reality gap): ML methods often fail to deliver the claimed functionality or social impacts. This paper investigates the claim-reality gap and makes a normative argument for developing accountability mechanisms for it. In making the argument, we make three contributions. First, we show why the symptom - absence of social claim accountability - is problematic. Second, we coin dead zone of accountability - a lens that scholars and practitioners can use to identify opportunities for new forms of accountability. We apply this lens to the claim-reality gap and provide a diagnosis by identifying cognitive and structural resistances to accountability in the claim-reality gap. Finally, we offer a prescription - two potential collaborative research agendas that can help create the condition for social claim accountability. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2508_08739 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Dead Zone of Accountability: Why Social Claims in Machine Learning Research Should Be Articulated and Defended Kou, Tianqi Calacci, Dana Lin, Cindy Computers and Society Many Machine Learning research studies use language that describes potential social benefits or technical affordances of new methods and technologies. Such language, which we call "social claims", can help garner substantial resources and influence for those involved in ML research and technology production. However, there exists a gap between social claims and reality (the claim-reality gap): ML methods often fail to deliver the claimed functionality or social impacts. This paper investigates the claim-reality gap and makes a normative argument for developing accountability mechanisms for it. In making the argument, we make three contributions. First, we show why the symptom - absence of social claim accountability - is problematic. Second, we coin dead zone of accountability - a lens that scholars and practitioners can use to identify opportunities for new forms of accountability. We apply this lens to the claim-reality gap and provide a diagnosis by identifying cognitive and structural resistances to accountability in the claim-reality gap. Finally, we offer a prescription - two potential collaborative research agendas that can help create the condition for social claim accountability. |
| title | Dead Zone of Accountability: Why Social Claims in Machine Learning Research Should Be Articulated and Defended |
| topic | Computers and Society |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.08739 |