AI ethics and governance

At Palantir, we believe that responsible AI is not an afterthought. Rather, it is fundamental to how we build technology. Our approach centers on developing software that enables responsible AI use throughout the entire system lifecycle, recognizing that ethical considerations extend beyond model development alone to encompass the full technology system, from data foundations and processing pipelines to user interfaces and human decision-making workflows. Rather than treating ethical considerations as separate compliance requirements, our platform integrates responsible AI capabilities throughout the development lifecycle.

This document outlines how Palantir's AI platform (AIP) actively supports eight core themes of responsible AI development. Each theme represents not just a principle, but a set of concrete capabilities and workflows designed to help users build trustworthy AI systems that are responsible, ethically sound, and effective in practice. This comprehensive approach ensures that users have the tools and workflows needed to address responsible AI requirements systematically, whether they are working with traditional machine learning models or generative AI systems.


Equitable: Fair, unbiased, non-discriminatory

AI systems should be inclusive and accessible and should not result in unfair discrimination against individuals or groups.

Platform capabilities

AIP offers features for identifying sources of bias in data, evaluating models for bias, and monitoring fairness concerns during model use.

  • Sensitive Data Scanner can automatically identify protected attributes and potential bias sources in datasets, enabling proactive assessment of fairness risks before they impact model training, evaluation, or use.
  • Subset evaluation in Modeling Objectives allows systematic evaluation of model performance across different groups within an evaluation dataset, surfacing potential disparate impacts that aggregate metrics might hide. For example, subset evaluation can be used to run model evaluation and easily compare model performance across demographic groups in an evaluation dataset.
  • AIP Evals allows you to evaluate the performance of AIP Logic functions across diverse test cases. With experiments in AIP Evals, users can further adjust input parameters to the model to understand how changes in certain inputs to the model might change the model's response.
  • Data health monitoring provides ongoing assessment of data representativeness and quality, helping identify when datasets may systematically under- or over-represent specific populations.

Implementation workflow

Teams can identify fairness risks early in their data preparation process using Sensitive Data Scanner and data health monitoring to detect protected attributes and imbalances in their data foundation before model development begins. This addresses potential bias at the data level. However, bias can also emerge from the model itself even with high-quality data, so both subset evaluation through Modeling Objectives and AIP Evals provides systematic testing to detect unequal model performance across demographic groups. When bias is detected at either level, teams can implement targeted mitigation strategies such as re-sampling, collecting additional representative data, or adjusting algorithmic approaches.


Explainable: Interpretable, understandable, transparent

AI systems should not be black boxes. Instead, to build trust in AI systems, users should understand how they work as much as possible.

Platform capabilities

AIP provides tools to help users understand how AI systems work, from debugging generative AI reasoning to evaluating traditional model performance.

  • The Modeling Objectives evaluation dashboard provides detailed model interpretability through feature importance analysis, performance breakdowns, and evaluation results that can be understood by both technical and non-technical stakeholders.
  • AIP Evals enables systematic testing and evaluation with both default and custom evaluation libraries, allowing teams to assess model behavior in ways that align with their specific domain requirements.
  • AIP Logic tools enable delegation of specific tasks to purpose-built, interpretable tools rather than relying solely on LLM processing, creating more explainable AI systems through composable, auditable components.
  • AIP Logic debug view provides visibility into chain-of-thought reasoning and tool orchestration within LLM-based systems, showing how the system delegates tasks and makes decisions through transparent handoffs to explainable components.
  • AIP Observability delivers thorough monitoring and debugging capabilities across AI workflows, providing detailed execution traces, performance metrics, and system behavior insights that help teams understand and troubleshoot their AI systems.

Implementation workflow

Version control systems automatically capture model development decisions and rationale throughout the development process. For generative AI systems, the debug view in AIP Logic provides real-time visibility into how LLMs orchestrate tasks and delegate to explainable tools, while AIP Observability delivers comprehensive execution traces that help teams understand system behavior. Teams can design more transparent systems by using AIP Logic tools to delegate specific tasks to interpretable components rather than relying solely on LLM processing. Testing and evaluation approaches through AIP Evals and Modeling Objectives complement these capabilities by presenting model performance metrics in formats accessible to both technical teams and business stakeholders.


Reliable: Safe, secure, resilient, robust

AI systems should be built with capabilities for assessing safety, security, and effectiveness throughout their entire lifecycle.

Platform capabilities

AIP enables secure, controlled deployment and continuous monitoring of AI systems to ensure safety and reliability throughout their lifecycle.

  • Model deployments for traditional AI/ML include direct deployments and Modeling Objectives live deployments, both providing controlled processes with options for automatic or manual upgrades depending on governance needs.
  • Functions versioning and release management for generative AI enables controlled deployment of AIP Logic through semantic versioning, backward compatibility checks, and version control workflows.
  • Rollback mechanisms allow immediate reversion to previous model versions when issues are detected, minimizing the impact of model failures or security breaches.
  • Comprehensive monitoring through inference history, system alerts, and continuous evaluation ensures that model performance degradation or security issues are detected quickly.
  • Access controls and data markings provide granular security restrictions based on user roles, data sensitivity, and geographic requirements, ensuring that AI systems respect privacy and security boundaries.
  • Georestrictions ensure that model requests and responses remain within specified jurisdictions, supporting regulatory compliance requirements across different regions and legal frameworks.
  • Encryption at rest and transit is a core part of our shared security responsibility model, with additional advanced capabilities for data protection that can be applied throughout the AI development lifecycle.
  • Capacity limits enable administrators to manage LLM usage and prevent service disruptions from unexpected load spikes, ensuring robust and stable AI workflows even under variable demand conditions.

Implementation workflow

Access controls and data markings establish security boundaries from the outset, with georestrictions ensuring that model requests and responses remain within compliant jurisdictions. Encryption at rest and in transit protects information throughout the AI development lifecycle. Model deployments and pre-release functions can enforce staged testing procedures before production release, while capacity limits prevent service disruptions from unexpected LLM usage spikes. Real-time monitoring systems provide continuous oversight across security, performance, and operational metrics, with rollback capabilities enabling immediate response when issues are detected.


Traceable: Auditable, governable

AI systems should provide capabilities to document relevant development processes, data sources, and the provenance of all data used for building models.

Platform capabilities

AIP automatically captures comprehensive documentation and audit trails across the AI development lifecycle, from data provenance to deployment decisions.

  • Data Lineage provides complete visibility into data sources, transformations, and dependencies used in AI systems.
  • Workflow Lineage provides visibility into how AI is used to power the logic and actions of applications for decision-making.
  • Audit logs capture all system interactions, model evaluations, and deployment decisions, creating a comprehensive audit trail for compliance and oversight.
  • Modeling Objectives documentation centralizes all project information, evaluation results, and decision rationales to enable multi-stakeholder collaboration.
  • Documentation templates in Notepad can enable standardized, detailed records of model purpose, methodology, and limitations that can be shared with regulators, supervisors, and other stakeholders.
  • LLM cost governance through Resource Management provides visibility into AI usage costs and resource consumption, enabling organizations to track, monitor, and manage expenses associated with LLM deployments.

Implementation workflow

Data Lineage automatically captures provenance information as data flows through processing pipelines, providing complete visibility into data sources and transformations. Workflow Builder provides visibility into how AI powers application logic and decision-making workflows. Audit logs document all system interactions and decisions, while LLM cost governance tracks resource consumption and expenses, adding transparency to AI system operations. Documentation templates in Notepad and Modeling Objectives documentation enable teams to create standardized records that centralize project information, evaluation results, and decision rationale in formats suitable for regulatory review and internal audits.


Collaborative: Multi-stakeholder, interdisciplinary

Building AI systems should be an interdisciplinary process where scientists, engineers, domain experts, and other stakeholders work together.

Platform capabilities

AIP supports multi-stakeholder collaboration through flexible access controls, shared development environments, and evaluation frameworks accessible to users across different skill levels.

  • Role-based permissions allow organizations to configure access controls that match their governance structure, ensuring appropriate stakeholder involvement at each stage.
  • Code Workspaces and Code Repositories provide collaborative development environments that support both technical and non-technical contributors.
  • Workshop and collaborative analysis tools enable real-time collaborative data analysis, allowing stakeholders from different disciplines to work together on shared analyses and insights.
  • External data sharing and collaboration controls facilitate secure collaboration with external partners while maintaining governance oversight and data protection standards.
  • No-, low-, and pro-code evaluation frameworks accommodate different stakeholder skill levels, allowing domain experts to define custom evaluation criteria alongside standard technical metrics.

Implementation workflow

Role-based permissions and structured approval workflows create clear collaboration frameworks from project initiation. Code Workspaces and Code Repositories provide environments where technical and non-technical contributors can work together on AI development. Workshop tools enable real-time collaborative analysis across different disciplines, while external data sharing controls facilitate secure partnerships. Flexible evaluation frameworks ensure that domain experts, compliance officers, and technical teams each contribute their specialized expertise at appropriate points in the development process, rather than working in isolation.


Accountable: Liable, responsible

There should be clear definition of roles and workflows for people responsible for different parts of an AI system.

Platform capabilities

AIP establishes clear chains of responsibility through granular permissions, comprehensive audit trails, and structured approval workflows.

  • Granular permission management through groups and roles creates clear chains of responsibility for every aspect of AI development, deployment, and use.
  • Comprehensive audit trails document who made which decisions and when, enabling clear accountability for system outcomes.
  • Structured approval workflows through checks ensure that appropriate authorities review and approve critical decisions.
  • Checkpoints enable centralized acknowledgement and justification workflows that ensure stakeholders review and sign-off on critical AI-suggested decisions in operational workflows.

Implementation workflow

Granular permission management establishes clear accountability structures from the outset, defining who can take which actions throughout the AI lifecycle. Full audit trails automatically document decision-makers and their rationale, while structured approval workflows through checks and checkpoints create systematic review processes. Checkpoints specifically enable stakeholders to acknowledge and justify AI-suggested decisions in operational workflows. This creates transparent chains of responsibility that can be audited and verified without requiring additional manual tracking efforts.


Human-centered: Participatory, socially beneficial

AI systems should benefit individuals, society, and the environment overall. They should enhance rather than replace human decision-making.

Platform capabilities

AIP ensures that AI enhances rather than replaces human decision-making through structured decision support frameworks and mandatory human oversight mechanisms.

  • Ontology-based decision support provides structured frameworks for human-AI collaboration, ensuring that AI recommendations are presented in context that enhances rather than replaces human judgment.
  • Human oversight workflows through Ontology actions and approval processes ensure that critical decisions remain under human control while leveraging AI insights.
  • Dashboard and visualization capabilities present AI outputs in human-interpretable formats, enabling stakeholders to understand complex analytical results and make informed decisions based on AI recommendations.
  • Workflow automation with Checkpoints provides systematic approaches to automation that include mandatory human review points at critical decision stages, ensuring appropriate oversight while maintaining operational efficiency.
  • Opt-out and fallback mechanisms can be built into applications to ensure users retain control over AI-assisted processes.
  • Feedback loop integration enables continuous learning from human decisions to improve AI recommendations over time.

Implementation workflow

Ontology-based decision support frameworks present AI insights within structured workflows that preserve human agency and decision-making authority. Human oversight workflows through actions and approval processes ensure critical decisions remain under human control. Dashboard and visualization capabilities translate complex AI outputs into formats that enable informed human judgment, while workflow automation with human checkpoints ensures appropriate oversight at critical decision stages. Opt-out and fallback mechanisms can be designed into applications to ensure users retain control over AI-assisted processes. Feedback loop integration captures human decisions to continuously improve AI recommendations, creating a collaborative intelligence approach that enhances rather than replaces human expertise.


Getting started with responsible AI

Palantir's AI platform makes responsible AI systematic rather than ad hoc. The platform guides users of all skill levels and domains of expertise through established workflows that incorporate responsible AI principles:

  1. Focus on the fully integrated system, not just its component tools: Consider your AI system holistically, from data foundations and processing pipelines through user interfaces and human decision-making workflows. Use capabilities like Data Lineage and Pipeline Builder to understand how components connect across your system.
  2. Acknowledge technology's limits: Begin with a clear assessment of what your AI system can and cannot do, and what it should and should not be permitted to do. Use problem-first modeling approaches to define appropriate scope and limitations before development begins.
  3. Do not solve problems that should not be solved: Evaluate whether your use case is appropriate for AI intervention. Consider legal, ethical, and community norms before initiating development. Some problems may be technically feasible but inappropriate for mathematical optimization.
  4. Adhere to methodological best practices for sound data science: Leverage the platform's built-in evaluation frameworks, bias detection capabilities, and fairness assessment tools. Use Sensitive Data Scanner to identify protected attributes, employ subset evaluation to assess disparate impacts, and follow established methodologies for responsible feature usage.
  5. Keep AI responsible, accountable, and oriented towards humans: Design AI systems that enhance rather than replace human decision-making. Use Ontology-based decision support, human oversight workflows, and feedback loops to ensure AI recommendations complement human judgment while maintaining clear accountability through audit trails and approval workflows.
  6. Promote multi-stakeholder engagement: Configure checks and approval workflows that match your organization's governance structure. Use collaborative tools like Workshop and role-based permissions to ensure domain experts, compliance officers, technical teams, and other stakeholders contribute their expertise throughout the AI lifecycle.
  7. Ensure technical, governance, and cultural awareness: Combine the platform's technical capabilities (encryption, access controls, monitoring) with governance frameworks (approval workflows, audit trails) and cultural practices (training, stakeholder engagement) to create inclusive responsible AI practices that fit your organizational context.

Conclusion

Responsible AI is not a constraint on innovation. Instead, it is what makes AI systems trustworthy enough to use for critical decisions. Palantir embeds responsible AI principles into every aspect of the development lifecycle, enabling organizations to build AI systems that are not just technically sophisticated, but ethically sound and operationally reliable.

By taking an integrated approach that considers the full context of AI deployment, we help our users solve their most challenging problems while enabling them to maintain the highest standards of responsibility and governance.