Abstract:Data is central to the development and evaluation of machine learning (ML) models. However, the use of problematic or inappropriate datasets can result in harms when the resulting models are deployed. To encourage responsible AI practice through more deliberate reflection on datasets and transparency around the processes by which they are created, researchers and practitioners have begun to advocate for increased data documentation and have proposed several data documentation frameworks. However, there is little research on whether these data documentation frameworks meet the needs of ML practitioners, who both create and consume datasets. To address this gap, we set out to understand ML practitioners' data documentation perceptions, needs, challenges, and desiderata, with the ultimate goal of deriving design requirements that can inform future data documentation frameworks. We conducted a series of semi-structured interviews with 14 ML practitioners at a single large, international technology company. We had them answer a list of questions taken from datasheets for datasets~\citegebru2018datasheets. Our findings show that current approaches to data documentation are largely ad hoc and myopic in nature. Participants expressed needs for data documentation frameworks to be adaptable to their contexts, integrated into their existing tools and workflows, and automated wherever possible. Despite the fact that data documentation frameworks are often motivated from the perspective of responsible AI, participants did not make the connection between the questions that they were asked to answer and their responsible AI implications. In addition, participants often had difficulties prioritizing the needs of dataset consumers and providing information that someone unfamiliar with their datasets might need to know. Based on these findings, we derive seven design requirements for future data documentation frameworks such as more actionable guidance on how the characteristics of datasets might result in harms and how these harms might be mitigated, more explicit prompts for reflection, automated adaptation to different contexts, and integration into ML practitioners' existing tools and workflows.

A step forward in tracing and documenting dataset provenance

The Data Provenance Initiative: A Large Scale Audit of Dataset Licensing & Attribution in AI

A large-scale audit of dataset licensing and attribution in AI

Supporting Better Insights of Data Science Pipelines with Fine-grained Provenance

Provenance of specimen and data - A prerequisite for AI development in computational pathology

Data Portraits: Recording Foundation Model Training Data

Data Authenticity, Consent, & Provenance for AI are all broken: what will it take to fix them?

Machine Learning Pipelines: Provenance, Reproducibility and FAIR Data Principles

Advances, challenges and opportunities in creating data for trustworthy AI

Understanding Machine Learning Practitioners' Data Documentation Perceptions, Needs, Challenges, and Desiderata

To Authenticity, and Beyond! Building Safe and Fair Generative AI Upon the Three Pillars of Provenance

Distributed Ledger for Provenance Tracking of Artificial Intelligence Assets

Is Your AI Truly Yours? Leveraging Blockchain for Copyrights, Provenance, and Lineage

DECORAIT -- DECentralized Opt-in/out Registry for AI Training

Whose Ground Truth? Accounting for Individual and Collective Identities Underlying Dataset Annotation

Data Provenance in Healthcare: Approaches, Challenges, and Future Directions

Building Better Datasets: Seven Recommendations for Responsible Design from Dataset Creators

On Responsible Machine Learning Datasets with Fairness, Privacy, and Regulatory Norms

Pipeline Provenance for Analysis, Evaluation, Trust or Reproducibility

The lifecycle of provenance metadata and its associated challenges and opportunities