Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI & Society

aiqbench analysis

This research introduces "participatory provenance," a framework for auditing how AI-generated summaries of public consultations distribute semantic coverage across diverse viewpoints. The study reveals that official summaries often underrepresent critical perspectives on technology oversight and education, demonstrating the need to evaluate distributional fairness alongside factual coherence in democratic engagement processes.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Participatory provenance as representational auditing for AI-mediated public consultation

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2604.20711v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: AI-assisted consultation can speed large-scale public engagement, but concise summaries may reflect some submissions more closely than others. This paper introduces participatory provenance, a framework for auditing how semantic coverage is distributed from submissions to summary sentences. Applied to two topics in Canada's 2025 AI Strategy consultation (5,253 records; 2,861 participants), official summaries had higher observed mean coverage than exact-length random text, although statistical significance depended on the embedding model. Low coverage concentrated in semantic regions, especially those centered on criticism of educational technology and distrust of technology and oversight, whereas few or no records crossed the operational threshold in several better-covered regions. Same-budget, cross-fitted extractive benchmarks improved mean and lower-tail coverage on held-out submissions, showing that better semantic coverage was feasible without longer summaries. Consultation summaries should be evaluated not only for coherence and factual support, but also for how coverage is distributed across the range of submitted views.

Abstract:AI-assisted consultation can speed large-scale public engagement, but concise summaries may reflect some submissions more closely than others. This paper introduces participatory provenance, a framework for auditing how semantic coverage is distributed from submissions to summary sentences. Applied to two topics in Canada's 2025 AI Strategy consultation (5,253 records; 2,861 participants), official summaries had higher observed mean coverage than exact-length random text, although statistical significance depended on the embedding model. Low coverage concentrated in semantic regions, especially those centered on criticism of educational technology and distrust of technology and oversight, whereas few or no records crossed the operational threshold in several better-covered regions. Same-budget, cross-fitted extractive benchmarks improved mean and lower-tail coverage on held-out submissions, showing that better semantic coverage was feasible without longer summaries. Consultation summaries should be evaluated not only for coherence and factual support, but also for how coverage is distributed across the range of submitted views.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC)

arXiv:2604.20711 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2604.20711v3 [cs.AI] for this version)

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 164 words

Related coverage