The Limits of AI Data Transparency Policy: Three Disclosure Fallacies
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866914280279900160 |
|---|---|
| author | Shen, Judy Hanwen Liu, Ken Wang, Angelina Cen, Sarah H. Zhang, Andy K. Meinhardt, Caroline Zhang, Daniel Klyman, Kevin Bommasani, Rishi Ho, Daniel E. |
| author_facet | Shen, Judy Hanwen Liu, Ken Wang, Angelina Cen, Sarah H. Zhang, Andy K. Meinhardt, Caroline Zhang, Daniel Klyman, Kevin Bommasani, Rishi Ho, Daniel E. |
| contents | Data transparency has emerged as a rallying cry for addressing concerns about AI: data quality, privacy, and copyright chief among them. Yet while these calls are crucial for accountability, current transparency policies often fall short of their intended aims. Similar to nutrition facts for food, policies aimed at nutrition facts for AI currently suffer from a limited consideration of research on effective disclosures. We offer an institutional perspective and identify three common fallacies in policy implementations of data disclosures for AI. First, many data transparency proposals exhibit a specification gap between the stated goals of data transparency and the actual disclosures necessary to achieve such goals. Second, reform attempts exhibit an enforcement gap between required disclosures on paper and enforcement to ensure compliance in fact. Third, policy proposals manifest an impact gap between disclosed information and meaningful changes in developer practices and public understanding. Informed by the social science on transparency, our analysis identifies affirmative paths for transparency that are effective rather than merely symbolic. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2601_18127 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | The Limits of AI Data Transparency Policy: Three Disclosure Fallacies Shen, Judy Hanwen Liu, Ken Wang, Angelina Cen, Sarah H. Zhang, Andy K. Meinhardt, Caroline Zhang, Daniel Klyman, Kevin Bommasani, Rishi Ho, Daniel E. Computers and Society Artificial Intelligence Data transparency has emerged as a rallying cry for addressing concerns about AI: data quality, privacy, and copyright chief among them. Yet while these calls are crucial for accountability, current transparency policies often fall short of their intended aims. Similar to nutrition facts for food, policies aimed at nutrition facts for AI currently suffer from a limited consideration of research on effective disclosures. We offer an institutional perspective and identify three common fallacies in policy implementations of data disclosures for AI. First, many data transparency proposals exhibit a specification gap between the stated goals of data transparency and the actual disclosures necessary to achieve such goals. Second, reform attempts exhibit an enforcement gap between required disclosures on paper and enforcement to ensure compliance in fact. Third, policy proposals manifest an impact gap between disclosed information and meaningful changes in developer practices and public understanding. Informed by the social science on transparency, our analysis identifies affirmative paths for transparency that are effective rather than merely symbolic. |
| title | The Limits of AI Data Transparency Policy: Three Disclosure Fallacies |
| topic | Computers and Society Artificial Intelligence |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.18127 |