AI Transparency Atlas: Framework, Scoring, and Real-Time Model Card Evaluation Pipeline

Fuente: arXiv
Salvato in:
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autori principali: Mamirov, Akhmadillo, Azmain, Faiaz, Wang, Hanyu
Natura: Preprint
Pubblicazione: 2025
Soggetti:
Accesso online:
Tags: Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
_version_ 1866909960235909120
author Mamirov, Akhmadillo
Azmain, Faiaz
Wang, Hanyu
author_facet Mamirov, Akhmadillo
Azmain, Faiaz
Wang, Hanyu
contents AI model documentation is fragmented across platforms and inconsistent in structure, preventing policymakers, auditors, and users from reliably assessing safety claims, data provenance, and version-level changes. We analyzed documentation from five frontier models (Gemini 3, Grok 4.1, Llama 4, GPT-5, and Claude 4.5) and 100 Hugging Face model cards, identifying 947 unique section names with extreme naming variation. Usage information alone appeared under 97 distinct labels. Using the EU AI Act Annex IV and the Stanford Transparency Index as baselines, we developed a weighted transparency framework with 8 sections and 23 subsections that prioritizes safety-critical disclosures (Safety Evaluation: 25%, Critical Risk: 20%) over technical specifications. We implemented an automated multi-agent pipeline that extracts documentation from public sources and scores completeness through LLM-based consensus. Evaluating 50 models across vision, multimodal, open-source, and closed-source systems cost less than $3 in total and revealed systematic gaps. Frontier labs (xAI, Microsoft, Anthropic) achieve approximately 80% compliance, while most providers fall below 60%. Safety-critical categories show the largest deficits: deception behaviors, hallucinations, and child safety evaluations account for 148, 124, and 116 aggregate points lost, respectively, across all evaluated models.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2512_12443
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle AI Transparency Atlas: Framework, Scoring, and Real-Time Model Card Evaluation Pipeline
Mamirov, Akhmadillo
Azmain, Faiaz
Wang, Hanyu
Artificial Intelligence
Software Engineering
AI model documentation is fragmented across platforms and inconsistent in structure, preventing policymakers, auditors, and users from reliably assessing safety claims, data provenance, and version-level changes. We analyzed documentation from five frontier models (Gemini 3, Grok 4.1, Llama 4, GPT-5, and Claude 4.5) and 100 Hugging Face model cards, identifying 947 unique section names with extreme naming variation. Usage information alone appeared under 97 distinct labels. Using the EU AI Act Annex IV and the Stanford Transparency Index as baselines, we developed a weighted transparency framework with 8 sections and 23 subsections that prioritizes safety-critical disclosures (Safety Evaluation: 25%, Critical Risk: 20%) over technical specifications. We implemented an automated multi-agent pipeline that extracts documentation from public sources and scores completeness through LLM-based consensus. Evaluating 50 models across vision, multimodal, open-source, and closed-source systems cost less than $3 in total and revealed systematic gaps. Frontier labs (xAI, Microsoft, Anthropic) achieve approximately 80% compliance, while most providers fall below 60%. Safety-critical categories show the largest deficits: deception behaviors, hallucinations, and child safety evaluations account for 148, 124, and 116 aggregate points lost, respectively, across all evaluated models.
title AI Transparency Atlas: Framework, Scoring, and Real-Time Model Card Evaluation Pipeline
topic Artificial Intelligence
Software Engineering
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.12443