Expectations and Practices around AI Disclosure in CS Research
As generative AI tools find increasing use in research workflows, ongoing debates on their impact, appropriateness and responsible use have led policymakers to enact policies to disclose AI use at multiple publishing venues. However, are current AI disclosure policies and practices reflective of their purpose? In this work, we first investigate disclosure policies of top computer science venues and find that despite their prevalence, they remain highly under-specified. Secondly, through a survey of computer science researchers (N=$109$), we characterize the necessity of disclosures across diff
Lineage graph
Paper → model → repo connections mined from source citations (Tier-1 exact match).
Why these links exist
Every edge carries a method, confidence, and the source snippet that justified it — so bad links are debuggable.
- PossiblePossibly related (embedding) · 66%Regulators publish draft guidance on AI transparency →
- PossiblePossibly related (embedding) · 63%Restrictions on Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools to Process Disclosure Materials - JD Supra →
- PossiblePossibly related (embedding) · 58%We still don’t know how people are really using AI →
- PossiblePossibly related (embedding) · 55%Why Microsoft, Amazon, Google and Meta are spending billions on AI: Explained | Hindustan Times - Hindustan Times →
- PossiblePossibly related (embedding) · 52%AI girlfriend review site's secrets were exposed to the world for three weeks →
- FuzzySimilar title/name (fuzzy) · 59%google-research/google-research →
“Fuzzy title match (0.73): “Expectations and Practices around AI Disclosure in CS Resear” ≈ “google-research/google-research””
- LinkedLinked via arxiv author · 85%Arati Mohapatra →
“Expectations and Practices around AI Disclosure in CS Research”
- LinkedLinked via arxiv author · 85%Danish Pruthi →
“Expectations and Practices around AI Disclosure in CS Research”