# Model, System, and Dataset Cards > Three documentation formats structure AI transparency. Model Cards (Mitchell et al. 2019) — nutrition labels for models: training data, quantitative disaggregated analyses, ethical considerations, caveats; only 0.3% of Hugging Face model cards document ethical considerations (Oreamuno et al. 2023). Datasheets for Datasets (Gebru et al. 2018, CACM) — motivation, composition, collection process, labeling, distribution, maintenance; electronics-datasheet analogy. Data Cards (Pushkarna et al., Google 2022) — modular layered detail (telescopic, periscopic, microscopic) as boundary objects for diverse readers. 2024-2025 developments: automated generation via LLMs (CardGen, Liu et al. 2024); model-card detail correlates with up to 29% download increase on HF (Liang et al. 2024); verifiable attestations (Laminator, Duddu et al. 2024); sustainability reporting additions for carbon/water (Jouneaux et al. July 2025); EU/ISO regulatory cards emerging. System Cards (Sidhpurwala 2024; Meta system-level transparency; "Blueprints of Trust" arXiv:2509.20394) — end-to-end AI system documentation covering security capabilities, prompt-injection protection, data-exfiltration detection, alignment with human values. **Type:** Build **Languages:** Python (stdlib, model-card + datasheet + system-card generator) **Prerequisites:** Phase 18 · 18 (safety frameworks), Phase 18 · 24 (regulatory) **Time:** ~60 minutes ## Learning Objectives - Describe the original Mitchell et al. 2019 model card and the Gebru et al. 2018 datasheet. - Describe Data Cards' telescopic/periscopic/microscopic layering. - Describe System Cards and their end-to-end coverage. - State three 2024-2025 developments (automated generation, verifiable attestations, sustainability reporting). ## The Problem Regulatory frameworks (Lesson 24) and lab safety policies (Lesson 18) both require documentation. Documentation formats evolved from model-specific (model cards) to dataset-specific (datasheets) to system-specific (system cards). Each addresses a different scope of transparency. The 2024-2025 automation and verifiable-attestation work addresses the long-standing adoption problem. ## The Concept ### Model Cards (Mitchell et al. 2019) Sections: - Model details. - Intended use. - Factors (relevant demographic or environmental factors for evaluation). - Metrics. - Evaluation data. - Training data. - Quantitative analyses (disaggregated by factors). - Ethical considerations. - Caveats and recommendations. Adoption problem: Oreamuno et al. 2023 audit of Hugging Face model cards found only 0.3% document ethical considerations. ### Datasheets for Datasets (Gebru et al. 2018) Electronics-datasheet analogy. Sections: - Motivation (why was the dataset created). - Composition (what is in it). - Collection process (how was it assembled). - Labeling (if applicable). - Uses (intended, prohibited, risks). - Distribution. - Maintenance. Published in CACM 2021. The datasheet is the upstream documentation; the model card depends on the datasheet being accurate. ### Data Cards (Pushkarna et al., Google 2022) Modular layered detail. Three zoom levels: - **Telescopic.** High-level summary for non-experts. - **Periscopic.** Middle-level overview for ML practitioners. - **Microscopic.** Detailed feature-level documentation for auditors. Boundary-object framing: different readers extract different information from the same document. ### System Cards Scope: end-to-end AI system including model + safety stack + deployment context. Sections typically include: - Security capabilities. - Prompt-injection protection. - Data-exfiltration detection. - Alignment with stated human values. - Incident response. Sidhpurwala 2024 and Meta system-level transparency work. "Blueprints of Trust" (arXiv:2509.20394) formalizes the System Card as the deployment-layer complement to Model Cards. ### 2024-2025 developments - **CardGen (Liu et al. 2024).** Automated model-card generation via LLMs; reports higher objectivity than many human-authored cards on the standardized Mitchell 2019 fields. - **Download correlation (Liang et al. 2024).** Detailed model cards correlate with up to 29% higher download rates on HF — adoption pressure is now market-driven, not only compliance-driven. - **Laminator (Duddu et al. 2024).** Verifiable attestations via hardware TEE / cryptographic signatures — allows the model card to carry a proof-of-claim, not just a claim. - **Sustainability (Jouneaux et al. July 2025).** Additions for carbon, water, and compute-energy footprint; emerging ISO standards. - **Regulatory cards.** EU AI Act (Lesson 24) GPAI Code of Practice Transparency chapter requires model cards as a compliance artifact. ### Where this fits in Phase 18 Lessons 24-25 are regulatory and CVE layers. Lesson 26 is the documentation layer. Lesson 27 is training-data governance, which is the datasheet's upstream. Lesson 28 is the research ecosystem that produces evaluations referenced in cards. ```figure an-card-scopes ``` ## Use It `code/main.py` generates a minimal model card, datasheet, and system card for a toy deployment. Each follows the canonical section structure. You can inspect the format and compare the three scopes. ## Ship It This lesson produces `outputs/skill-card-audit.md`. Given a model card, datasheet, or system card, it audits section coverage, numerical disaggregation, and whether verifiable attestations are present. ## Exercises 1. Run `code/main.py`. Inspect the generated cards. Identify sections that are weak (placeholder-only) and specify what evidence would strengthen them. 2. Extend the model card with a quantitative disaggregated analysis across two demographic groups (Lesson 20). 3. Read Oreamuno et al. 2023 on the 0.3% adoption rate. Propose one structural change to the model card specification that would increase ethical-considerations adoption. 4. Laminator (Duddu et al. 2024) uses TEEs for verifiable attestations. Design a model-card field that carries a cryptographic attestation of an evaluation result and describe the verifier's role. 5. Write a System Card (System Card, not Model Card) for one of your past projects or a hypothetical deployment. Identify the highest-value section for third-party auditors. ## Key Terms | Term | What people say | What it actually means | |------|-----------------|------------------------| | Model Card | "the Mitchell card" | Mitchell et al. 2019 standard documentation for ML models | | Datasheet | "the Gebru datasheet" | Gebru et al. 2018 standard documentation for datasets | | Data Card | "the Pushkarna card" | Google 2022 modular layered data documentation | | System Card | "the deployment card" | End-to-end AI system documentation including safety stack | | Boundary object | "different readers, one doc" | Data Cards framing: same document serves diverse audiences | | Verifiable attestation | "the Laminator attestation" | Cryptographic or TEE proof attached to a documentation claim | | Sustainability field | "carbon / water footprint" | Emerging 2025 addition for environmental accounting | ## Further Reading - [Mitchell et al. — Model Cards for Model Reporting (arXiv:1810.03993, FAT* 2019)](https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.03993) — the canonical model card - [Gebru et al. — Datasheets for Datasets (CACM 2021, arXiv:1803.09010)](https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.09010) — datasheet paper - [Pushkarna et al. — Data Cards (Google 2022)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.01075) — layered data documentation - [Sidhpurwala et al. — Blueprints of Trust (arXiv:2509.20394)](https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.20394) — System Card formalization