The Transparency–Reconstruction Gap: Why AI Governance Records Cannot Yet Answer for Decisions

This phenomenon statement introduces the Transparency–Reconstruction Gap: the gap between AI governance records that make systems visible and records that preserve enough decision-event content to reconstruct how consequential decisions became possible, actionable, and accountable. It distinguishes visibility from reconstructability and positions decision-event content as a requirement for accountability, contestation, and post-event review across domains including autonomous vehicle reporting, public-sector algorithmic transparency, defence AI, policing, shelter and welfare allocation, and institutional response records. The statement argues that the problem is not simply missing data. In some cases, the failure is built into the schema itself: records may disclose systems, purposes, datasets, risks, or outcomes while failing to preserve who acted, when, on what basis, under what uncertainty, and through what oversight. The document is intended as a programme-level phenomenon statement and external entry point for future work on decision-event reconstructability, record infrastructures, and AI governance accountability.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-06-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20765201
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
39.91
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Transparency–Reconstruction Gap: Why AI Governance Records Cannot Yet Answer for Decisions

Hon Bor So
4 citations
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
39.91
article

The Transparency–Reconstruction Gap: Why AI Governance Records Cannot Yet Answer for Decisions

Hon Bor So
article en
4 citations

Abstract

This phenomenon statement introduces the Transparency–Reconstruction Gap: the gap between AI governance records that make systems visible and records that preserve enough decision-event content to reconstruct how consequential decisions became possible, actionable, and accountable. It distinguishes visibility from reconstructability and positions decision-event content as a requirement for accountability, contestation, and post-event review across domains including autonomous vehicle reporting, public-sector algorithmic transparency, defence AI, policing, shelter and welfare allocation, and institutional response records. The statement argues that the problem is not simply missing data. In some cases, the failure is built into the schema itself: records may disclose systems, purposes, datasets, risks, or outcomes while failing to preserve who acted, when, on what basis, under what uncertainty, and through what oversight. The document is intended as a programme-level phenomenon statement and external entry point for future work on decision-event reconstructability, record infrastructures, and AI governance accountability.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
39.91
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.