Legally-Informed Explainable AI

Explanations for artificial intelligence (AI) systems are intended to support the people who are impacted by AI systems deployed in high-stakes decision-making environments, such as doctors, patients, teachers, students, housing applicants, and many others. To protect people and support the responsible development of AI, explanations need to be actionable—helping people take pragmatic action in response to an AI system—and contestable—enabling people to push back against an AI system’s use and its determinations. For many high-stakes domains, such as healthcare, education, and finance, the sociotechnical environment includes significant legal implications that impact how people rely on AI explanations. For example, physicians who use AI decision support systems may need information on how accepting or rejecting an AI determination will protect them from lawsuits or help them advocate for their patients. In this paper, we make the case for Legally-Informed Explainable AI, responding to the need to integrate and design for legal considerations when creating AI explanations. We describe three stakeholder groups with different informational and actionability needs, and provide practical recommendations to tackle design challenges around the design of explainable AI systems that incorporate legal considerations.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2025-04-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15170443
Primary Topic
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Legally-Informed Explainable AI

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
article

Legally-Informed Explainable AI

article en

Abstract

Explanations for artificial intelligence (AI) systems are intended to support the people who are impacted by AI systems deployed in high-stakes decision-making environments, such as doctors, patients, teachers, students, housing applicants, and many others. To protect people and support the responsible development of AI, explanations need to be actionable—helping people take pragmatic action in response to an AI system—and contestable—enabling people to push back against an AI system’s use and its determinations. For many high-stakes domains, such as healthcare, education, and finance, the sociotechnical environment includes significant legal implications that impact how people rely on AI explanations. For example, physicians who use AI decision support systems may need information on how accepting or rejecting an AI determination will protect them from lawsuits or help them advocate for their patients. In this paper, we make the case for Legally-Informed Explainable AI, responding to the need to integrate and design for legal considerations when creating AI explanations. We describe three stakeholder groups with different informational and actionability needs, and provide practical recommendations to tackle design challenges around the design of explainable AI systems that incorporate legal considerations.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 75%
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.