Model Cards for Model Reporting · HackerPapers discussions

Model Cards for Model Reporting — mentioned by aesthesia

Tue, 09 Jun 2026 18:17:22 GMT

Because it's not a user manual? The idea of a model card originated in 2018 (see https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.03993) as a summary of important facts about a model. At the time, this was typically an image classifier or tabular ML model. Model cards became an important concept in AI governance, and they started expanding once models started getting more capable. The point of a model/system card is to document where the model came from and the evaluations that have been run, make a case that the model will be safe and reliable in its intended applications, and warn about any potential dangers…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Model Cards for Model Reporting — mentioned by aesthesia

Fri, 01 May 2026 15:44:34 GMT

The "model card" concept actually comes from a pre-LLM Google paper (https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.03993), where the example cards did fit on a single page. The concept quickly became a standard component of AI governance frameworks, and Hugging Face adopted it as a reasonable standard format for a model README. As LLMs emerged and became more capable at broader ranges of tasks, model cards expanded to the sizes we see today.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Model Cards for Model Reporting — mentioned by layer8

Wed, 15 Oct 2025 20:28:19 GMT

For those wondering where the “card” terminology originated: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.03993 Maybe at 39 pages we should start looking for a different term…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Model Cards for Model Reporting — mentioned by radeeyate

Fri, 18 Jul 2025 04:14:43 GMT

This is where model cards came from, as far as I know: https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.03993

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Model Cards for Model Reporting — mentioned by Imnimo

Thu, 05 Dec 2024 22:37:09 GMT

To my knowledge, this is the origin of model cards: https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.03993 However, often the things we get from companies do not look very much like what was described in this paper. So it's fair to question if they're even the same thing.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Model Cards for Model Reporting — mentioned by Animats

Sun, 11 Aug 2024 18:54:34 GMT

Had to track through five links to find out what a "system card" is. It's an instance of a "model card", some broad headings to be filled in.[1] • Model Details. • Intended Use. • Factors. Factors could include demographic or phenotypic groups, environmental conditions, technical attributes, or others • Metrics. • Evaluation Data. • Training Data • Quantitative Analyses • Caveats and Recommendations Meta's PR describes a "system card", but doesn't provide one.[2] It doesn't, interestingly, seem to include the initial built-in prompts used as constraints. [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.03993…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Model Cards for Model Reporting — mentioned by nsagent

Wed, 27 Dec 2023 14:48:32 GMT

Please at least read the paper before appealing to authority. It is a well designed set of experiments that clearly demonstrates that the notion of a "phase change" (rapid shift in capabilities) as a popularized by many people claiming emergence is actually a gradual improvement with more data. But if you do want to appeal to Lecun as an authority, then maybe you'll accept that these (re)tweets that clearly indicate he finds the insights from the paper to be valid: https://nitter.1d4.us/ylecun/status/1736479356917063847 https://nitter.1d4.us/rao2z/status/1736464000836309259 (retweeted) As for…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Model Cards for Model Reporting — mentioned by binarymax

Wed, 23 Aug 2023 19:00:09 GMT

This is a nice concise format to display model cards (https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.03993). I like the style and the "standard". But, I do agree with other commenters that the 'nutrition' term is probably inappropriate. We get the style from the card - you don't need to carry the analogy any further.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Model Cards for Model Reporting — mentioned by wolterlw

Tue, 15 Jun 2021 15:20:15 GMT

If this becomes something like huggingface for Computer Vision - awesome. For now, it's a shame model descriptions seem to often be lifted straight from README. Having a more standardized description, something like model cards [1] (CV example [2]) would be hugely beneficial IMO. [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.03993.pdf [2] https://drive.google.com/file/d/1f39lSzU5Oq-j_OXgS67KfN5wNso...

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Model Cards for Model Reporting — mentioned by joshuamorton

Wed, 01 Jul 2020 05:06:14 GMT

> In fact, this is exactly what the authors did. In fact, they did so after Timnit brought up her objection, and did so by taking advantage of Timnit's research (the model card they added is a direct result of research Timnit was involved with: https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.03993).

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Model Cards for Model Reporting — mentioned by aaron-santos

Wed, 01 Jul 2020 03:10:33 GMT

The discussion mentioned the Tutorial on Fairness Accountability Transparency and Ethics in Computer Vision at CVPR 2020. The tutorial was recorded in three parts. The third part[1] includes solutions. These are either direct quotes or paraphrases of the bullet points contained therein. 1. Disaggregated Evaluations[2][3], Counterfactual Testing[4], Interpretability Methods[5] 2. Recognize [l]imitations(sic) of technical approaches (this discussion) 3. Model documentation frameworks[2] 4. Standardized framework for transparent dataset documentation [6] 5. Positionality awareness [7] 6.…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.