Who is Responsible? The Data, Models, Users or Regulations? A Comprehensive Survey on Responsible Generative AI for a Sustainable Future

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.08650v5
• Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 16:04:24 GMT
• Title: Who is Responsible? The Data, Models, Users or Regulations? A Comprehensive Survey on Responsible Generative AI for a Sustainable Future
• Authors: Shaina Raza, Rizwan Qureshi, Anam Zahid, Safiullah Kamawal, Ferhat Sadak, Joseph Fioresi, Muhammaed Saeed, Ranjan Sapkota, Aditya Jain, Anas Zafar, Muneeb Ul Hassan, Aizan Zafar, Hasan Maqbool, Ashmal Vayani, Jia Wu, Maged Shoman,
• Abstract summary: Generative AI is moving rapidly from research into real world deployment across sectors.<n>This study synthesizes the landscape of responsible generative AI across methods, benchmarks, and policies.
• Score: 17.980029412706106
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Generative AI is moving rapidly from research into real world deployment across sectors, which elevates the need for responsible development, deployment, evaluation, and governance. To address this pressing challenge, in this study, we synthesize the landscape of responsible generative AI across methods, benchmarks, and policies, and connects governance expectations to concrete engineering practice. We follow a prespecified search and screening protocol focused on post-ChatGPT era with selective inclusion of foundational work for definitions, and we conduct a narrative and thematic synthesis. Three findings emerge; First, benchmark and practice coverage is dense for bias and toxicity but relatively sparse for privacy and provenance, deepfake and media integrity risk, and system level failure in tool using and agentic settings. Second, many evaluations remain static and task local, which limits evidence portability for audit and lifecycle assurance. Third, documentation and metric validity are inconsistent, which complicates comparison across releases and domains. We outline a research and practice agenda that prioritizes adaptive and multimodal evaluation, privacy and provenance testing, deepfake risk assessment, calibration and uncertainty reporting, versioned and documented artifacts, and continuous monitoring. Limitations include reliance on public artifacts and the focus period, which may under represent capabilities reported later. The survey offers a path to align development and evaluation with governance needs and to support safe, transparent, and accountable deployment across domains. Project page: https://anas-zafar.github.io/responsible-ai.github.io , GitHub: https://github.com/anas-zafar/Responsible-AI

Related papers

• AI Agent Systems: Architectures, Applications, and Evaluation [4.967019713320407]
  AI agents combine foundation models with reasoning, planning, memory, and tool use.<n>We organize prior work into a unified taxonomy spanning agent components.<n>We discuss key design trade-offs -- latency vs. accuracy, autonomy vs. controllability, and capability vs. reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-05T02:38:40Z)
• DRBench: A Realistic Benchmark for Enterprise Deep Research [81.49694432639406]
  DRBench is a benchmark for evaluating AI agents on complex, open-ended deep research tasks in enterprise settings.<n>We release 15 deep research tasks across 10 domains, such as Sales, Cybersecurity, and Compliance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-30T18:47:20Z)
• Safe and Certifiable AI Systems: Concepts, Challenges, and Lessons Learned [45.44933002008943]
  This white paper presents the T"UV AUSTRIA Trusted AI framework.<n>It is an end-to-end audit catalog and methodology for assessing and certifying machine learning systems.<n>Building on three pillars - Secure Software Development, Functional Requirements, and Ethics & Data Privacy - it translates the high-level obligations of the EU AI Act into specific, testable criteria.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-08T17:52:08Z)
• CoCoNUTS: Concentrating on Content while Neglecting Uninformative Textual Styles for AI-Generated Peer Review Detection [60.52240468810558]
  We introduce CoCoNUTS, a content-oriented benchmark built upon a fine-grained dataset of AI-generated peer reviews.<n>We also develop CoCoDet, an AI review detector via a multi-task learning framework, to achieve more accurate and robust detection of AI involvement in review content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-28T06:03:11Z)
• Never Compromise to Vulnerabilities: A Comprehensive Survey on AI Governance [211.5823259429128]
  We propose a comprehensive framework integrating technical and societal dimensions, structured around three interconnected pillars: Intrinsic Security, Derivative Security, and Social Ethics.<n>We identify three core challenges: (1) the generalization gap, where defenses fail against evolving threats; (2) inadequate evaluation protocols that overlook real-world risks; and (3) fragmented regulations leading to inconsistent oversight.<n>Our framework offers actionable guidance for researchers, engineers, and policymakers to develop AI systems that are not only robust and secure but also ethically aligned and publicly trustworthy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T09:42:56Z)
• Beyond Easy Wins: A Text Hardness-Aware Benchmark for LLM-generated Text Detection [0.38233569758620056]
  We present a novel evaluation paradigm for AI text detectors that prioritizes real-world and equitable assessment.<n>Our benchmark, SHIELD, addresses these limitations by integrating both reliability and stability factors into a unified evaluation metric.<n>We develop a model-agnostic humanification framework that modifies AI text to more closely resemble human authorship, incorporating a controllable hardness parameter.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-21T06:37:27Z)
• FieldWorkArena: Agentic AI Benchmark for Real Field Work Tasks [52.47895046206854]
  FieldWorkArena is a benchmark for agentic AI targeting real-world field work.<n>This paper defines a new action space that agentic AI should possess for real world work environment benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-26T08:21:46Z)
• Towards Automated Situation Awareness: A RAG-Based Framework for Peacebuilding Reports [2.230742111425553]
  This paper introduces a dynamic Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) system that autonomously generates situation awareness reports.<n>Our system constructs query-specific knowledge bases on demand, ensuring timely, relevant, and accurate insights.<n>The system is tested across multiple real-world scenarios, demonstrating its effectiveness in producing coherent, insightful, and actionable reports.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-14T16:36:30Z)
• Generative AI for Autonomous Driving: Frontiers and Opportunities [145.6465312554513]
  This survey delivers a comprehensive synthesis of the emerging role of GenAI across the autonomous driving stack.<n>We begin by distilling the principles and trade-offs of modern generative modeling, encompassing VAEs, GANs, Diffusion Models, and Large Language Models.<n>We categorize practical applications, such as synthetic data generalization, end-to-end driving strategies, high-fidelity digital twin systems, smart transportation networks, and cross-domain transfer to embodied AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-13T17:59:20Z)
• Enterprise Architecture as a Dynamic Capability for Scalable and Sustainable Generative AI adoption: Bridging Innovation and Governance in Large Organisations [55.2480439325792]
  Generative Artificial Intelligence is a powerful new technology with the potential to boost innovation and reshape governance in many industries.<n>However, organisations face major challenges in scaling GenAI, including technology complexity, governance gaps and resource misalignments.<n>This study explores how Enterprise Architecture Management can meet the complex requirements of GenAI adoption within large enterprises.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-09T07:41:33Z)
• Towards Trustworthy GUI Agents: A Survey [64.6445117343499]
  This survey examines the trustworthiness of GUI agents in five critical dimensions.<n>We identify major challenges such as vulnerability to adversarial attacks, cascading failure modes in sequential decision-making.<n>As GUI agents become more widespread, establishing robust safety standards and responsible development practices is essential.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-30T13:26:00Z)
• AILuminate: Introducing v1.0 of the AI Risk and Reliability Benchmark from MLCommons [62.374792825813394]
  This paper introduces AILuminate v1.0, the first comprehensive industry-standard benchmark for assessing AI-product risk and reliability.<n>The benchmark evaluates an AI system's resistance to prompts designed to elicit dangerous, illegal, or undesirable behavior in 12 hazard categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-19T05:58:52Z)
• Responsible Artificial Intelligence (RAI) in U.S. Federal Government : Principles, Policies, and Practices [0.0]
  Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have made tremendous advancements in the past decades.<n> rapid growth of AI/ML and its proliferation in numerous private and public sector applications, while successful, has opened new challenges and obstacles for regulators.<n>With almost little to no human involvement required for some of the new decision-making AI/ML systems, there is now a pressing need to ensure the responsible use of these systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-12T16:06:37Z)
• Using AI Alignment Theory to understand the potential pitfalls of regulatory frameworks [55.2480439325792]
  This paper critically examines the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) Uses insights from Alignment Theory (AT) research, which focuses on the potential pitfalls of technical alignment in Artificial Intelligence. As we apply these concepts to the EU AI Act, we uncover potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement in the regulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T17:38:38Z)
• Do Responsible AI Artifacts Advance Stakeholder Goals? Four Key Barriers Perceived by Legal and Civil Stakeholders [59.17981603969404]
  The responsible AI (RAI) community has introduced numerous processes and artifacts to facilitate transparency and support the governance of AI systems. We conduct semi-structured interviews with 19 government, legal, and civil society stakeholders who inform policy and advocacy around responsible AI efforts. We organize these beliefs into four barriers that help explain how RAI artifacts may (inadvertently) reconfigure power relations across civil society, government, and industry.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-22T00:14:37Z)
• Responsible AI Question Bank: A Comprehensive Tool for AI Risk Assessment [18.966590454042272]
  The study introduces our Responsible AI (RAI) Question Bank, a comprehensive framework and tool designed to support diverse AI initiatives.<n>By integrating AI ethics principles such as fairness, transparency, and accountability into a structured question format, the RAI Question Bank aids in identifying potential risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-02T22:40:20Z)
• Particip-AI: A Democratic Surveying Framework for Anticipating Future AI Use Cases, Harms and Benefits [54.648819983899614]
  General purpose AI seems to have lowered the barriers for the public to use AI and harness its power. We introduce PARTICIP-AI, a framework for laypeople to speculate and assess AI use cases and their impacts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-21T19:12:37Z)
• POLARIS: A framework to guide the development of Trustworthy AI systems [3.02243271391691]
  There is a significant gap between high-level AI ethics principles and low-level concrete practices for AI professionals. We develop a novel holistic framework for Trustworthy AI - designed to bridge the gap between theory and practice. Our goal is to empower AI professionals to confidently navigate the ethical dimensions of Trustworthy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-08T01:05:16Z)
• Responsible AI Governance: A Systematic Literature Review [8.318630741859113]
  This paper aims to examine the existing literature on AI Governance. The focus of this study is to analyse the literature to answer key questions: WHO is accountable for AI systems' governance, WHAT elements are being governed, WHEN governance occurs within the AI development life cycle, and HOW it is executed through various mechanisms like frameworks, tools, standards, policies, or models. The findings of this study provides a foundational basis for future research and development of comprehensive governance models that align with RAI principles.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-18T05:22:36Z)
• Investigating Responsible AI for Scientific Research: An Empirical Study [4.597781832707524]
  The push for Responsible AI (RAI) in such institutions underscores the increasing emphasis on integrating ethical considerations within AI design and development. This paper aims to assess the awareness and preparedness regarding the ethical risks inherent in AI design and development. Our results have revealed certain knowledge gaps concerning ethical, responsible, and inclusive AI, with limitations in awareness of the available AI ethics frameworks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-15T06:40:27Z)
• Responsible AI Pattern Catalogue: A Collection of Best Practices for AI Governance and Engineering [20.644494592443245]
  We present a Responsible AI Pattern Catalogue based on the results of a Multivocal Literature Review (MLR) Rather than staying at the principle or algorithm level, we focus on patterns that AI system stakeholders can undertake in practice to ensure that the developed AI systems are responsible throughout the entire governance and engineering lifecycle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-12T00:09:08Z)
• Building Bridges: Generative Artworks to Explore AI Ethics [56.058588908294446]
  In recent years, there has been an increased emphasis on understanding and mitigating adverse impacts of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies on society. A significant challenge in the design of ethical AI systems is that there are multiple stakeholders in the AI pipeline, each with their own set of constraints and interests. This position paper outlines some potential ways in which generative artworks can play this role by serving as accessible and powerful educational tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-25T22:31:55Z)
• An interdisciplinary conceptual study of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for helping benefit-risk assessment practices: Towards a comprehensive qualification matrix of AI programs and devices (pre-print 2020) [55.41644538483948]
  This paper proposes a comprehensive analysis of existing concepts coming from different disciplines tackling the notion of intelligence. The aim is to identify shared notions or discrepancies to consider for qualifying AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-07T12:01:31Z)
• Toward Trustworthy AI Development: Mechanisms for Supporting Verifiable Claims [59.64274607533249]
  AI developers need to make verifiable claims to which they can be held accountable. This report suggests various steps that different stakeholders can take to improve the verifiability of claims made about AI systems. We analyze ten mechanisms for this purpose--spanning institutions, software, and hardware--and make recommendations aimed at implementing, exploring, or improving those mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-15T17:15:35Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.