Model Cards for Model Reporting
Trained machine learning models are increasingly used to perform high-impact tasks in areas such as law enforcement, medicine, education, and employment. In order to clarify the intended use cases of machine learning models and minimize their usage in contexts for which they are not well suited, we recommend that released models be accompanied by documentation detailing their performance characteristics. In this paper, we propose a framework that we call model cards, to encourage such transparent model reporting. Model cards are short documents accompanying trained machine learning models that provide benchmarked evaluation in a variety of conditions, such as across different cultural, demographic, or phenotypic groups (e.g., race, geographic location, sex, Fitzpatrick skin type) and intersectional groups (e.g., age and race, or sex and Fitzpatrick skin type) that are relevant to the intended application domains. Model cards also disclose the context in which models are intended to be used, details of the performance evaluation procedures, and other relevant information. While we focus primarily on human-centered machine learning models in the application fields of computer vision and natural language processing, this framework can be used to document any trained machine learning model. To solidify the concept, we provide cards for two supervised models: One trained to detect smiling faces in images, and one trained to detect toxic comments in text. We propose model cards as a step towards the responsible democratization of machine learning and related AI technology, increasing transparency into how well AI technology works. We hope this work encourages those releasing trained machine learning models to accompany model releases with similar detailed evaluation numbers and other relevant documentation.
Code (12)
Tasks
BIG-bench Machine LearningmodelSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
EvalCards: A Framework for Standardized Evaluation Reporting
Evaluation has long been a central concern in NLP, and transparent reporting practices are more critical than ever in today's landscape of rapidly released open-access models. Drawing on a survey of recent work on evalua…
Evaluation Cards: An Interpretive Layer for AI Evaluation Reporting
AI evaluation results are produced at scale but reported inconsistently across leaderboards, model cards, benchmark papers, and company blogs. The cost is interpretive: readers cannot reliably compare results across sour…
Benchmarking bias: Expanding clinical AI model card to incorporate bias reporting of social and non-social factors
Clinical AI model reporting cards should be expanded to incorporate a broad bias reporting of both social and non-social factors. Non-social factors consider the role of other factors, such as disease dependent, anatomic…
BenchmarkingRollout Cards: A Reproducibility Standard for Agent Research
Reproducibility problems that have long affected machine learning and reinforcement learning are now surfacing in agent research: papers compare systems by reported scores while leaving the rollout records behind those s…
Reinforcement LearningModel Reporting for Certifiable AI: A Proposal from Merging EU Regulation into AI Development
Despite large progress in Explainable and Safe AI, practitioners suffer from a lack of regulation and standards for AI safety. In this work we merge recent regulation efforts by the European Union and first proposals for…
Document AI