{"resourceId":"asc-csiro-responsible-ai-sport-guide","versions":[{"version":"external-f87f9a706ec0e207a5087b7fd6253423a2e2ee96ea736a7125bb2ccec3478c08","resource":{"id":"asc-csiro-responsible-ai-sport-guide","title":"Australian sport guide makes contestability and operational ownership explicit","organization":"Australian Sports Commission and CSIRO","sector":"Collegiate athletics","geography":"Australia; qualified transfer to U.S. collegiate athletics","publishedAt":"Exact publication date not established from inspected document","publicationDate":null,"eventDate":null,"sourceName":"A Guide for Responsible AI in Sport","sourceLabel":"Government sport guidance; original document inspected via sportanddev mirror","sourceUrl":"https://www.sportanddev.org/sites/default/files/2026-04/Responsible_AI_in_sport.pdf","evidenceClass":"standards-guidance","outcomeClass":"cautionary","topics":["data-security","governance-procurement","accessibility-workforce","operating-model","developers-agents"],"finding":"Voluntary guidance pairs human accountability with consent, contestability and practical role-specific checks. It is not an evaluation of deployment effectiveness.","sledRelevance":"Sport-specific operating controls can inform college-athletics reviews; Australian legal references and youth-sport practices are not automatically U.S. collegiate obligations.","evidence":"Guide synthesizes best practice, ethical principles and stakeholder insights. Inspected consent, risk, accountability and checklist sections. No controlled outcome baseline or demonstrated harm-reduction estimate.","architectureImplications":"Interpretation: make overrides, incident records and data-permission changes observable; constrain agent permissions to approved tasks.","governanceImplications":"Interpretation: assign a decision owner and a route to challenge consequential outputs.","securityPrivacyImplications":"Interpretation: test purpose restrictions and withdrawal handling across upstream collection and downstream vendors.","caveats":"Voluntary Australian guidance, not U.S. legal advice or evidence of causal benefit. Publisher landing page confirms the guide, but its signed download failed; the substantive mirror PDF was readable. PDF screenshots failed, so checklist review used extracted text.","streamIds":["college-athletics"],"roles":{"sales":"Interpretation: Use the guide to frame a controls assessment for an athletics department expanding AI across teams. Stakeholders include athletes, operations, campus privacy staff and procurement. Ask how someone challenges an output and who can stop a tool. A bounded engagement could map one consequential workflow and rehearse its complaint process. The value hypothesis is clearer accountability and fewer unresolved handoffs. The guide does not establish savings, local compliance or a need to purchase a new platform.","engineering":"Interpretation: Convert the chosen local policy into testable permissions and event logs. Prerequisites are an approved purpose, a data inventory and named decision owners. Demonstrate that an override survives subsequent synchronization, a revoked user loses access and disallowed data cannot be exported. Verify vendor behavior rather than relying on a checklist response. Infrastructure placement remains institution-specific. For agents, explicitly test denied actions and stop controls. The Australian document supplies a governance lens, not an architecture specification.","delivery":"Interpretation: An athletics governance lead should coordinate implementation with privacy, IT, coaches and athlete representatives. Map responsibilities, build accessible notices and rehearse an incorrect-output complaint before launch. Dependencies include vendor support and an institutionally approved retention policy. Proposed acceptance criteria include a named owner for every handoff, completed access and deletion tests, and successful routing of all critical rehearsal cases. Review after material tool or purpose changes. Risks include nominal consent, inaccessible appeals and policy commitments unsupported by actual system behavior."},"retrievedAt":"2026-09-11T03:01:11Z","enrichedAt":"2026-09-11T03:01:33Z","enrichmentBasis":"retrieved source","accessibilityWorkforceImplications":"Interpretation: use plain-language notices, accessible complaints and role-specific training.","procurementImplications":"Interpretation: request evidence of review, export, incident and deletion functions in demonstrations and contracts.","operatingModelImplications":"Interpretation: connect athletics, privacy staff, technical support and athlete representation in a maintained review process.","updateExplanation":"Neither mirror nor publisher landing page appears among the 182 scanned archive records. Newly broadens operational-control coverage; no recent release date is inferred from the mirror path.","sourceVerification":{"openedUrl":"https://www.sportanddev.org/sites/default/files/2026-04/Responsible_AI_in_sport.pdf","referenceExcerpt":"This guide is voluntary","promptVersion":"sled-research-v3.1","model":null,"basis":"agent-reported inspection"}}}]}