Measuring What Matters: Connecting AI Ethics Evaluations to System Attributes, Hazards, and Harms

October 11, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Shalaleh Rismani, Renee Shelby, Leah Davis, Negar Rostamzadeh, AJung Moon arXiv ID 2510.10339 Category cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction Cross-listed cs.AI, cs.LG Citations 2 Venue Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Over the past decade, an ecosystem of measures has emerged to evaluate the social and ethical implications of AI systems, largely shaped by high-level ethics principles. These measures are developed and used in fragmented ways, without adequate attention to how they are situated in AI systems. In this paper, we examine how existing measures used in the computing literature map to AI system components, attributes, hazards, and harms. Our analysis draws on a scoping review resulting in nearly 800 measures corresponding to 11 AI ethics principles. We find that most measures focus on four principles - fairness, transparency, privacy, and trust - and primarily assess model or output system components. Few measures account for interactions across system elements, and only a narrow set of hazards is typically considered for each harm type. Many measures are disconnected from where harm is experienced and lack guidance for setting meaningful thresholds. These patterns reveal how current evaluation practices remain fragmented, measuring in pieces rather than capturing how harms emerge across systems. Framing measures with respect to system attributes, hazards, and harms can strengthen regulatory oversight, support actionable practices in industry, and ground future research in systems-level understanding.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Human-Computer Interaction

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted