https://taxonomy.eticas.ai/risk/system-explainability
Maturity: emerging
Stakeholders misinterpret or misunderstand the intended purpose or use of an AI system based on its outputs, due to insufficient explanation of how outputs are produced.
This subcategory is emerging. It has not yet been validated through established assessment methods.
System type: ADM and LLM systems
Lifecycle stages: Post Processing
Status. Each mapping shows what it rests on. Reviewed means a reviewer has confirmed the mapping against the concept’s current definition and the framework edition the taxonomy currently references; when the only confirmation is that of the person who wrote the mapping, it reads Reviewed (author’s confirmation). Outdated means it was reviewed, but the concept’s definition has changed since, so the review has to be repeated. The other statuses mean that no review has been recorded yet. Inherited mappings have been in the taxonomy since before v5.7.0 and are unchanged. They carry no record of who made them or how, and some were checked by hand when the taxonomy first published its mappings. Agent-proposed mappings come from a review carried out by AI agents, which read the framework’s text and the concept’s definition and agreed on the relation; no person has confirmed them yet. Provisional mappings were made without access to the framework’s text. Unreviewed mappings are older mappings whose target or relation was revised in v5.7.0, and any other mapping without a review. Mappings to a superseded edition of a framework are not shown: where the provision continues, they are carried to the current edition. Mappings a review has changed or rejected are not shown.
| Framework | Reference | Status |
|---|---|---|
| NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI 100-1) | Explainable and Interpretable | Inherited |
| Framework | Reference | Status |
|---|---|---|
| W3C Data Privacy Vocabulary — AI Extension | Explainability Risk | Inherited |
Source: HRA project taxonomy