Papers › Who is Responsible? The Data, Models, Users or Regulations? A Comprehensive Survey on...

Who is Responsible? The Data, Models, Users or Regulations? A Comprehensive Survey on Responsible Generative AI for a Sustainable Future

15 Jan 2025arXiv:2502.08650links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Shaina Raza, Rizwan Qureshi, Anam Zahid, Amgad Muneer, Anas Zafar, Safiullah Kamawal, Ferhat Sadak, Joseph Fioresi, Muhammaed Saeed, Ranjan Sapkota, Aditya Jain, Muneeb Ul Hassan, Aizan Zafar, Hasan Maqbool, Ashmal Vayani, Jia Wu, Maged Shoman

The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.

Generative AI is rapidly moving from research to deployment, elevating the need for responsible development, evaluation, and governance. We conduct a PRISMA guided review of 232 studies (November 2022 - December 2025), spanning large language models, vision language models, diffusion models, and agentic pipelines. We make four contributions: (1) the first survey bridging governance principles, technical evaluation, and domain deployment across all four system types; (2) a ten-criterion rubric (C1-C10) scoring major AI safety benchmarks on risk-surface coverage, paired with a policy crosswalk mapping benchmarks to regulatory requirements; (3) twelve lifecycle KPIs, explainability guidance for foundation models, and a testbed catalogue; and (4) domain-specific analysis across healthcare, finance, education, arts, agriculture, and defense. Three findings emerge: benchmark coverage is dense for bias and toxicity but sparse for privacy, provenance, deepfakes, and system-level failures in agentic settings; evaluations remain largely static and task local, limiting audit portability; and inconsistent documentation complicates cross-release comparison. We outline a research agenda prioritizing adaptive multimodal evaluation, privacy and provenance testing, deepfake risk assessment, calibration reporting, versioned artifacts, and continuous monitoring. This survey offers a structured path to align generative AI evaluation with governance needs for safe and accountable deployment.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

anas-zafar/responsible-ai officialmentioned in paper report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections