Report on the Designing Accountable Software Systems Workshop

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.02804v1
• Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2026 19:22:02 GMT
• Title: Report on the Designing Accountable Software Systems Workshop
• Abstract summary: The workshop was conducted as a collaborative systematization of knowledge that culminated in several research directions.<n>The findings include the importance of clarifying definitions and responsibilities within accountable organizations.<n>Further research was identified as needed to study the ways to improve the translation of accountability structures into the software design process.
• Score: 18.019209577424792
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The Workshop on Designing Accountable Software Systems (DASS) was convened in November 2024 with support from the U.S. National Science Foundation to engage a wide range of current and future stakeholders from government, academia, and industry on the cross-disciplinary topic of accountability in software systems. Over two days, attendees engaged in a series of panels, invited talks, and breakout sessions covering: (1) the dimensions of accountability, including legal compliance as well as business and societal aspects and drivers; (2) a conceptual model of the various structures needed to realize accountability; (3) the sources of legal requirements that affect software; (4) the operationalization of legal requirements in software; (5) the requirements to preserve evidence needed to conduct investigations; and (6) a range of challenges and contextual factors beyond software that affect why some accountability structures succeed, while others fail. The workshop was conducted as a collaborative systematization of knowledge that culminated in several research directions. The findings include the importance of clarifying definitions and responsibilities within accountable organizations, which can affect whether those researching accountability are making assumptions that limit the generalizability of findings. Further research was also identified as needed to study the ways to improve the translation of accountability structures into the software design process while improving engagement with stakeholders, such as legislators, regulators, business executives and system developers. Finally, a key finding was the high demands that DASS-like research projects place on interdisciplinary teams: both in terms of team formation and sustainment, as well as, the specific demands of cross-disciplinary learning that covers both research methods, research dissemination, and career development.

Related papers

• No One to Blame: A Framework of Constitutive AI Unaccountability [2.665734616339289]
  We argue that certain configurations of actors, systems, and institutions render AI accountability conceptually unachievable regardless of effort.<n>We introduce the concept of AI unaccountability to capture these configurations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-12T14:25:05Z)
• Perspectives, Needs and Challenges for Sustainable Software Engineering Teams: A FinServ Case Study [0.5097809301149341]
  This research focuses on a financial services company (FinServCo) that invited us to investigate perceptions of sustainability in their IT function.<n>We conducted an exploratory qualitative case study using interviews and a focus group with six higher management employees and 16 software engineers.<n>Our study found a clear divergence in how sustainability is perceived between organisational levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-15T21:21:02Z)
• Rigor in AI: Doing Rigorous AI Work Requires a Broader, Responsible AI-Informed Conception of Rigor [83.99510317617694]
  We argue that a broader conception of what rigorous AI research and practice should entail is needed.<n>We aim to provide useful language and a framework for much-needed dialogue about the AI community's work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-17T15:44:41Z)
• Challenges in designing research infrastructure software in multi-stakeholder contexts [1.1786249372283562]
  This study investigates the challenges in designing research infrastructure software for automated software publication in multi-stakeholder environments.<n>It examines technical, organizational, and social requirements across research software engineers (RSEs) and infrastructure facility staff (IFs)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-02T09:50:30Z)
• ORMind: A Cognitive-Inspired End-to-End Reasoning Framework for Operations Research [56.961539386979354]
  We introduce ORMind, a cognitive-inspired framework that enhances optimization through counterfactual reasoning.<n>Our approach emulates human cognition, implementing an end-to-end workflow that transforms requirements into mathematical models and executable code.<n>It is currently being tested internally in Lenovo's AI Assistant, with plans to enhance optimization capabilities for both business and consumer customers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-02T05:11:21Z)
• A Survey of Frontiers in LLM Reasoning: Inference Scaling, Learning to Reason, and Agentic Systems [93.8285345915925]
  Reasoning is a fundamental cognitive process that enables logical inference, problem-solving, and decision-making.<n>With the rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs), reasoning has emerged as a key capability that distinguishes advanced AI systems.<n>We categorize existing methods along two dimensions: (1) Regimes, which define the stage at which reasoning is achieved; and (2) Architectures, which determine the components involved in the reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-12T01:27:49Z)
• Systematic Mapping Study on Requirements Engineering for Regulatory Compliance of Software Systems [17.03076288786146]
  As the diversity and complexity of regulations affecting Software-Intensive Products and Services (SIPS) is increasing, software engineers need to address the growing regulatory scrutiny. As with any other non-negotiable requirements, SIPS compliance should be addressed early in requirements engineering (RE) This study addresses the pressing need for a structured overview of the state of the art in software RE and its contribution to regulatory compliance of SIPS.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-04T10:04:14Z)
• Making Software Development More Diverse and Inclusive: Key Themes, Challenges, and Future Directions [50.545824691484796]
  We identify six themes around the theme challenges and opportunities to improve Software Developer Diversity and Inclusion (SDDI)<n>We identify benefits, harms, and future research directions for the four main themes.<n>We discuss the remaining two themes, Artificial Intelligence & SDDI and AI & Computer Science education, which have a cross-cutting effect on the other themes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-10T16:18:11Z)
• Report of the 1st Workshop on Generative AI and Law [78.62063815165968]
  This report presents the takeaways of the inaugural Workshop on Generative AI and Law (GenLaw) A cross-disciplinary group of practitioners and scholars from computer science and law convened to discuss the technical, doctrinal, and policy challenges presented by law for Generative AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-11T04:13:37Z)
• Challenges in aligning requirements engineering and verification in a large-scale industrial context [7.92131557859946]
  This paper presents preliminary findings of interviews that identify key challenges in aligning requirements and verification processes. The findings of this study can be used by practitioners as a basis for investigating alignment in their organizations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-23T20:08:49Z)
• 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.