A dynamic contextual responsibility framework for evaluating large language models in socio-technical contexts

Current Responsible AI metrics, including truthfulness, bias, and toxicity scores, often reduce responsibility in large language models (LLMs) to static technical proxies, obscuring the contextual, ethical, and temporal dynamics through which accountability is produced in real-world settings. This study introduces Dynamic Contextual Responsibility (DCR), a conceptual and operational framework that defines responsibility as a dynamic, context-conditioned, and socio-technical relation shaped by system behaviour, governance arrangements, and institutional norms. DCR integrates five dimensions, ethical foundations, contextual grounding, behavioural properties, governance mechanisms, and temporal dynamics, into a unified and interpretable construct. To illustrate its operational implications, the framework is examined through multi-model, multi-context, and multi-temporal evaluations using established benchmarks such as TruthfulQA, FEVER, and HotpotQA. The analysis shows that approximately 22% of outputs classified as responsible under static metrics are reclassified once contextual and temporal factors are considered, revealing latent ethical and governance risks. By foregrounding context, governance, and temporal change, DCR advances Responsible AI evaluation toward more dynamic, transparent, and plural forms of accountability, with direct relevance for emerging regulatory regimes, including the EU AI Act and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
AI and Ethics
Published
2026-03-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-026-01072-9
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

A dynamic contextual responsibility framework for evaluating large language models in socio-technical contexts

Deepika Roselind Johnson, Ayodeji Olusegun Ibitoye, Abikoye Oluwakemi Christiana, Rita Orji et al.
AI and Ethics
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

A dynamic contextual responsibility framework for evaluating large language models in socio-technical contexts

Deepika Roselind Johnson, Ayodeji Olusegun Ibitoye, Abikoye Oluwakemi Christiana, Rita Orji, Babafemi Gabriel Sorinolu
article en

Abstract

Current Responsible AI metrics, including truthfulness, bias, and toxicity scores, often reduce responsibility in large language models (LLMs) to static technical proxies, obscuring the contextual, ethical, and temporal dynamics through which accountability is produced in real-world settings. This study introduces Dynamic Contextual Responsibility (DCR), a conceptual and operational framework that defines responsibility as a dynamic, context-conditioned, and socio-technical relation shaped by system behaviour, governance arrangements, and institutional norms. DCR integrates five dimensions, ethical foundations, contextual grounding, behavioural properties, governance mechanisms, and temporal dynamics, into a unified and interpretable construct. To illustrate its operational implications, the framework is examined through multi-model, multi-context, and multi-temporal evaluations using established benchmarks such as TruthfulQA, FEVER, and HotpotQA. The analysis shows that approximately 22% of outputs classified as responsible under static metrics are reclassified once contextual and temporal factors are considered, revealing latent ethical and governance risks. By foregrounding context, governance, and temporal change, DCR advances Responsible AI evaluation toward more dynamic, transparent, and plural forms of accountability, with direct relevance for emerging regulatory regimes, including the EU AI Act and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework.

AI and EthicsVol. 6(2)
Dalhousie University (CA), University of Ilorin (NG), Houghton University (US), University of Greenwich (GB), Vellore Institute of Technology University (IN)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 34%
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.