Responsible AI Question Bank for Risk Assessment

The rapid growth of AI underscores the need for responsible AI (RAI) practices. While many RAI checklists and frameworks exist, practitioners still struggle with how to use them in practice across roles and stages. We introduce the RAI Question Bank, a role-tagged and lifecycle-tagged, evidence-oriented question set that simplifies interaction for executives, managers, and developers while preserving comprehensive coverage mapped to leading frameworks and regulations (e.g., EU AI Act). With comprehensive taxonomy and linkage between lower-level questions and higher-level themes, the Question Bank facilitates cohesive assessments. Two case studies show how it surfaces risks, prioritizes effort, and supports policy alignment.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
ACM Computing Surveys
Published
2026-01-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3790096
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Responsible AI Question Bank for Risk Assessment

Boming Xia, Jon Whittle, Sung Une Lee, Liming Zhu et al.
ACM Computing Surveys
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Responsible AI Question Bank for Risk Assessment

Boming Xia, Jon Whittle, Sung Une Lee, Liming Zhu, Qinghua Lu, Harsha Perera, Yue Liu
article en

Abstract

The rapid growth of AI underscores the need for responsible AI (RAI) practices. While many RAI checklists and frameworks exist, practitioners still struggle with how to use them in practice across roles and stages. We introduce the RAI Question Bank, a role-tagged and lifecycle-tagged, evidence-oriented question set that simplifies interaction for executives, managers, and developers while preserving comprehensive coverage mapped to leading frameworks and regulations (e.g., EU AI Act). With comprehensive taxonomy and linkage between lower-level questions and higher-level themes, the Question Bank facilitates cohesive assessments. Two case studies show how it surfaces risks, prioritizes effort, and supports policy alignment.

ACM Computing SurveysVol. 58(9)
Australian National University (AU), Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU), Deakin University (AU), Queensland University of Technology (AU), Australian Institute of Business (AU), Melbourne School of Theology (AU), MIT University (MK), Health Sciences and Nutrition (AU), RMIT University (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 75%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
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.

Responsible AI Question Bank for Risk Assessment — Boming Xia, Jon Whittle, et al. · ACM Computing Surveys (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS