I AM J AI TRANSPARENCY POLICY
Commitments for clear, accurate, audience-appropriate communication about I am J AI systems, capabilities, limitations, data practices, governance, and accountability.
Transparency supports informed use, responsible deployment, meaningful oversight, and public trust. It does not require disclosure of personal data, confidential customer information, trade secrets, security-sensitive details, or information that could enable abuse.
I am J seeks to provide the right information to the right audience at the right time. End users, enterprise administrators, researchers, regulators, partners, and affected communities may require different levels and forms of information.
Our goal is honest communication: to explain what a system is intended to do, what it should not be relied upon to do, how people remain responsible, and how concerns can be raised and addressed.
1. Scope
This Policy applies to public communications, product interfaces, documentation, institutional proposals, contracts, grant materials, research collaboration, enterprise deployments, and material incident communications involving I am J AI systems.
2. Disclosure of AI Interaction
Users should be informed when they are interacting with an AI system or receiving materially AI-generated content where a reasonable person would expect that disclosure.
- AI must not impersonate a human, official, professional, institution, or emergency responder in a deceptive manner.
- Voice, conversational, visual, and agent-like interfaces should identify their AI nature appropriately.
- Disclosures should be understandable and not hidden in inaccessible or overly technical text.
3. Capability and Limitation Statements
We seek to describe capabilities based on evidence and within the conditions tested.
- We do not present generated content as guaranteed fact.
- We distinguish current production capabilities from prototypes, research, roadmap items, and aspirations.
- We communicate important dependencies such as connectivity, external data, third-party services, device sensors, and user permissions.
- We identify material limitations, uncertainty, and contexts in which qualified professional advice or independent verification is required.
4. Purpose, Intended Use, and Boundaries
Material AI systems and enterprise deployments should have documented intended purposes, user groups, operating environments, and prohibited or unsupported uses.
- Customers and administrators should receive sufficient information to configure and operate the system responsibly.
- Material expansion beyond the reviewed purpose may require reassessment and updated documentation.
5. Information About Data
Where applicable and appropriate, I am J provides information about categories of data collected or processed, purposes, retention, sharing, and user choices through privacy notices, product documentation, contracts, or deployment materials.
- We do not disclose personal data or confidential information under the guise of transparency.
- We communicate when important outputs depend on user-provided data, location, sensors, external sources, or third-party integrations.
- Data provenance and quality limitations are documented to responsible internal or institutional stakeholders where material.
6. Model and System Information
The level of model and system disclosure is proportionate to audience, risk, and legitimate need.
- Information may include system purpose, model or provider category, significant capabilities, evaluation approach, known limitations, safety controls, human oversight, and change-management practices.
- Exact model weights, proprietary prompts, security configurations, and abuse-sensitive details may remain confidential.
- Third-party model involvement does not remove I am J’s responsibility for the way our products and deployments are designed and operated.
7. AI-Generated Content and Source Context
I am J interfaces should help users distinguish generated synthesis from verified source material where feasible.
- Citations, links, provenance, timestamps, or source context may be provided when available and appropriate.
- The absence of a source indicator must not be interpreted as proof that a claim is verified.
- Users should be encouraged to verify information before consequential reliance.
8. Transparency for High-Impact Uses
Institutions using AI in consequential contexts should provide affected people with appropriate notice of AI involvement, the human decision-maker, significant factors or limitations, and available correction, complaint, or appeal mechanisms.
- Trade-secret or security concerns should not be used to eliminate meaningful notice or lawful due process.
- I am J may restrict deployments that cannot provide adequate transparency or accountability.
9. Performance and Evaluation Claims
Performance claims should identify the relevant task, population, language, conditions, metric, and limitations where necessary to prevent misunderstanding.
- Aggregate metrics should not conceal known material failure modes.
- Laboratory or benchmark performance should not be presented as guaranteed real-world performance.
- Comparisons should be fair, reproducible where practical, and not selectively misleading.
10. Safety, Security, and Incident Communication
I am J balances transparency with the need to protect users, investigations, security controls, and system integrity.
- Material incidents may be communicated to affected customers, users, partners, or authorities according to severity, law, and contract.
- Communications should describe known impact, immediate protective steps, uncertainty, and corrective action where appropriate.
- We may delay or limit details that would compromise an active investigation or enable further abuse.
11. Transparency in Grants, Research, and Partnerships
Materials provided to grant reviewers, universities, venture capital firms, private companies, governments, and NGOs should distinguish evidence from projections and disclose material assumptions, dependencies, limitations, and conflicts of interest.
- Research results should not be overstated.
- Pilot outcomes should not be generalized beyond the evaluated setting without justification.
- Partnership or funding relationships should not be represented as endorsements unless explicitly authorized.
12. Public Governance Documents
I am J publishes selected governance documents to make our commitments understandable and reviewable. Public documents may include our AI Ethics Charter, Responsible AI Principles, AI Safety Framework, Human Oversight Policy, privacy and security information, and acceptable-use requirements.
Public governance statements are supported by internal processes that evolve with the company. Publication does not waive legal privilege, confidentiality, intellectual property rights, or security protections.
13. Questions, Complaints, and Corrections
Users and stakeholders may raise questions, identify errors, report misleading behavior, or request correction through the I am J contact page.
- Reports should be reviewed by an appropriate owner.
- Materially inaccurate public claims should be corrected in a timely and proportionate manner.
- Good-faith criticism and independent scrutiny are valuable inputs to responsible development.
14. Review and Updates
Transparency information will be updated when material changes occur in products, models, data practices, risk, law, or deployment conditions.
Older documents may be retained for historical accountability where appropriate, with clear version and date information.
15. Contact and Governance Questions
Questions, concerns, research inquiries, partnership proposals, or reports related to this document may be submitted through the I am J contact page.