Whose Transparency is it Anyway? Understanding Generative AI Transparency Needs and Gaps Across Stakeholders
arXiv:2611.05549v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Transparency has become a central principle in AI governance, yet there is little agreement about what transparency means, for whom, and in what contexts. Drawing on interpretive flexibility within the Social Construction of Technology, this paper examines how different stakeholders understand and experience transparency in generative AI. This study draws from a global survey of 400 end-users, AI builders, and policymakers, complemented by a struct
Read original source
Source record
Research analysis
Research claim
Paper identifier: 2611.05549. Source account: arXiv:2611.05549v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Transparency has become a central principle in AI governance, yet there is little agreement about what transparency means, for whom, and in what contexts. Drawing on interpretive flexibility within the Social Construction of Technology, this paper examines how different stakeholders understand and experience transparency in generative AI. This study draws from a global survey of 400 end-users, AI builders, and policymakers, complemented by a struct
Evaluation record
No structured result table, dataset, baseline or evaluation budget has been extracted. Any performance numbers in the source account remain attributed claims.
What the result supports
Interpret results only for the reported model version, task, data and inference budget. Community votes, downloads or a benchmark position do not establish reliability in a different workflow.
Validity gaps
Check sample selection, baseline configuration, uncertainty, contamination risk, negative results and access to code or weights. No reproduction by WeWorkBuddy is recorded here.
Verification plan
Read the paper or model card and its evaluation appendix. Reproduce one bounded result against the stated baseline, then test a representative user task and record where the conclusion fails.