Talk:Algorithmic transparency
|  | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 
 
 
 
 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Good definition, needs more meat
[edit]Many years, ago I worked for the Oxford English Dictionary, writing definitions of words. When I looked at this draft, my first thought was "this is a really well-written definition". My second thought was "but it's just a definition, it needs more body. It needs to explain why algorithmic transparency matters."
For example, if a bank has a policy of refusing to provide loans to black people, that's clearly unacceptable. If instead it uses a neural net or other such opaque decision process, which uses place of residence and other such data to decide on what loans to offer, and the result is that it rarely grants loans to black people, that should also be unacceptable. The bank should not be able to get away with saying "it's a highly trained algorithm, no-one here understands how it works."
I'm sure tThere are respected published sources that make the same point as the above paragraph.[1][2][3][4][5] (Ok, I've expressed an opinion in that paragraph, and it should not be expressed in the voice of Wikipedia. What matters is that many people hold that opinion.) Maproom (talk) 07:34, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- ^ "Privacy expert argues "algorithmic transparency" is crucial for online freedoms at UNESCO knowledge café". unesco.org.
- ^ Tétu, Stéphanie. "TransAlgo: assessing the accountability and transparency of algorithmic systems". inria. INRIA.
- ^ Sadler, Denham. "Medcraft on ethics and algorithms". innovationaus.com. InnovationAus.
- ^ Petrasic; et al. "Algorithms and bias: What lenders need to know". whitecase.com. White & Case. {{cite web}}: Explicit use of et al. in:|last1=(help)
- ^ Lapowsky, Issie. "One State's Bail Reform Exposes the Promise and Pitfalls of Tech-Driven Justice". Wired.com. Wired.
COI edit request: journalism example of algorithmic transparency (AIJIM evidence chain)
[edit]|  | The user below has a request that an edit be made to Algorithmic transparency. That user has an actual or apparent conflict of interest. The requested edits backlog is very high. Please be extremely patient. There are currently 232 requests waiting for review. Please read the instructions for the parameters used by this template for accepting and declining them, and review the request below and make the edit if it is well sourced, neutral, and follows other Wikipedia guidelines and policies. | 
Proposal (applications/examples; not in the lead):
“In public-interest journalism, AIJIM describes a six-stage, evidence-first workflow that records decisions as an auditable evidence chain to support transparency.”[1]
COI disclosed; open to editors’ preferred placement. NamicGreen (talk) 16:54, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- ^ Tiltack, Torsten (2026) [16 October 2025]. "AIJIM: A Scalable Model for Real-Time AI in Environmental Journalism". In Arai, Kohei (ed.). Proceedings of the Future Technologies Conference (FTC) 2025, Volume 2. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems. Vol. 1676. Springer, Cham. pp. 398–416. doi:10.1007/978-3-032-07989-3_26.
- Start-Class Computing articles
- Low-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- Start-Class mathematics articles
- Low-priority mathematics articles
- Featured articles on Mathematics Portal
- Start-Class Computer science articles
- Low-importance Computer science articles
- WikiProject Computer science articles
- Start-Class AfC articles
- AfC submissions by date/06 June 2018
- Accepted AfC submissions
- Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests
 
	











