Abstract:AI audits are an increasingly popular mechanism for algorithmic accountability; however, they remain poorly defined. Without a clear understanding of audit practices, let alone widely used standards or regulatory guidance, claims that an AI product or system has been audited, whether by first-, second-, or third-party auditors, are difficult to verify and may exacerbate, rather than mitigate, bias and harm. To address this knowledge gap, we provide the first comprehensive field scan of the AI audit ecosystem. We share a catalog of individuals (N=438) and organizations (N=189) who engage in algorithmic audits or whose work is directly relevant to algorithmic audits; conduct an anonymous survey of the group (N=152); and interview industry leaders (N=10). We identify emerging best practices as well as methods and tools that are becoming commonplace, and enumerate common barriers to leveraging algorithmic audits as effective accountability mechanisms. We outline policy recommendations to improve the quality and impact of these audits, and highlight proposals with wide support from algorithmic auditors as well as areas of debate. Our recommendations have implications for lawmakers, regulators, internal company policymakers, and standards-setting bodies, as well as for auditors. They are: 1) require the owners and operators of AI systems to engage in independent algorithmic audits against clearly defined standards; 2) notify individuals when they are subject to algorithmic decision-making systems; 3) mandate disclosure of key components of audit findings for peer review; 4) consider real-world harm in the audit process, including through standardized harm incident reporting and response mechanisms; 5) directly involve the stakeholders most likely to be harmed by AI systems in the algorithmic audit process; and 6) formalize evaluation and, potentially, accreditation of algorithmic auditors.

An Algorithmic Equity Toolkit for Technology Audits by Community Advocates and Activists

A relationship and not a thing: A relational approach to algorithmic accountability and assessment documentation

The algorithm audit: Scoring the algorithms that score us

WeBuildAI

Algorithmic Bias and Risk Assessments: Lessons from Practice

Aequitas: A Bias and Fairness Audit Toolkit

Everyday Algorithm Auditing: Understanding the Power of Everyday Users in Surfacing Harmful Algorithmic Behaviors

Who Audits the Auditors? Recommendations from a field scan of the algorithmic auditing ecosystem

Participation and Division of Labor in User-Driven Algorithm Audits: How Do Everyday Users Work together to Surface Algorithmic Harms?

Towards algorithm auditing: managing legal, ethical and technological risks of AI, ML and associated algorithms

Why Algorithms Remain Unjust: Power Structures Surrounding Algorithmic Activity

The Right Tool for the Job: Open-Source Auditing Tools in Machine Learning

Algorithms as Social-Ecological-Technological Systems: an Environmental Justice Lens on Algorithmic Audits

Closing the AI Accountability Gap: Defining an End-to-End Framework for Internal Algorithmic Auditing

Law and the Emerging Political Economy of Algorithmic Audits

Designing Equitable Algorithms

AI Fairness 360: An extensible toolkit for detecting and mitigating algorithmic bias

Fairness in Algorithmic Recourse Through the Lens of Substantive Equality of Opportunity

Peer-induced Fairness: A Causal Approach for Algorithmic Fairness Auditing

Development and preliminary testing of Health Equity Across the AI Lifecycle (HEAAL): A framework for healthcare delivery organizations to mitigate the risk of AI solutions worsening health inequities

Seeing Like a Toolkit: How Toolkits Envision the Work of AI Ethics