Assurance Cases as Foundation Stone for Auditing AI-enabled and Autonomous Systems: Workshop Results and Political Recommendations for Action from the ExamAI Project

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2208.08198v1
• Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 10:05:07 GMT
• Title: Assurance Cases as Foundation Stone for Auditing AI-enabled and Autonomous Systems: Workshop Results and Political Recommendations for Action from the ExamAI Project
• Authors: Rasmus Adler and Michael Klaes
• Abstract summary: We investigate the way safety standards define safety measures to be implemented against software faults. Functional safety standards use Safety Integrity Levels (SILs) to define which safety measures shall be implemented. We propose the use of assurance cases to argue that the individually selected and applied measures are sufficient.
• Score: 2.741266294612776
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The European Machinery Directive and related harmonized standards do consider that software is used to generate safety-relevant behavior of the machinery but do not consider all kinds of software. In particular, software based on machine learning (ML) are not considered for the realization of safety-relevant behavior. This limits the introduction of suitable safety concepts for autonomous mobile robots and other autonomous machinery, which commonly depend on ML-based functions. We investigated this issue and the way safety standards define safety measures to be implemented against software faults. Functional safety standards use Safety Integrity Levels (SILs) to define which safety measures shall be implemented. They provide rules for determining the SIL and rules for selecting safety measures depending on the SIL. In this paper, we argue that this approach can hardly be adopted with respect to ML and other kinds of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Instead of simple rules for determining an SIL and applying related measures against faults, we propose the use of assurance cases to argue that the individually selected and applied measures are sufficient in the given case. To get a first rating regarding the feasibility and usefulness of our proposal, we presented and discussed it in a workshop with experts from industry, German statutory accident insurance companies, work safety and standardization commissions, and representatives from various national, European, and international working groups dealing with safety and AI. In this paper, we summarize the proposal and the workshop discussion. Moreover, we check to which extent our proposal is in line with the European AI Act proposal and current safety standardization initiatives addressing AI and Autonomous Systems

Related papers

• Safeguarding AI Agents: Developing and Analyzing Safety Architectures [0.0]
  This paper addresses the need for safety measures in AI systems that collaborate with human teams. We propose and evaluate three frameworks to enhance safety protocols in AI agent systems. We conclude that these frameworks can significantly strengthen the safety and security of AI agent systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-03T10:14:51Z)
• Safetywashing: Do AI Safety Benchmarks Actually Measure Safety Progress? [59.96471873997733]
  We propose an empirical foundation for developing more meaningful safety metrics and define AI safety in a machine learning research context. We aim to provide a more rigorous framework for AI safety research, advancing the science of safety evaluations and clarifying the path towards measurable progress.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-31T17:59:24Z)
• Cross-Modality Safety Alignment [73.8765529028288]
  We introduce a novel safety alignment challenge called Safe Inputs but Unsafe Output (SIUO) to evaluate cross-modality safety alignment. To empirically investigate this problem, we developed the SIUO, a cross-modality benchmark encompassing 9 critical safety domains, such as self-harm, illegal activities, and privacy violations. Our findings reveal substantial safety vulnerabilities in both closed- and open-source LVLMs, underscoring the inadequacy of current models to reliably interpret and respond to complex, real-world scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-21T16:14:15Z)
• Towards Guaranteed Safe AI: A Framework for Ensuring Robust and Reliable AI Systems [88.80306881112313]
  We will introduce and define a family of approaches to AI safety, which we will refer to as guaranteed safe (GS) AI. The core feature of these approaches is that they aim to produce AI systems which are equipped with high-assurance quantitative safety guarantees. We outline a number of approaches for creating each of these three core components, describe the main technical challenges, and suggest a number of potential solutions to them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T17:38:32Z)
• Navigating the EU AI Act: A Methodological Approach to Compliance for Safety-critical Products [0.0]
  This paper presents a methodology for interpreting the EU AI Act requirements for high-risk AI systems. We first propose an extended product quality model for AI systems, incorporating attributes relevant to the Act not covered by current quality models. We then propose a contract-based approach to derive technical requirements at the stakeholder level.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-25T14:32:18Z)
• Empowering Autonomous Driving with Large Language Models: A Safety Perspective [82.90376711290808]
  This paper explores the integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into Autonomous Driving systems. LLMs are intelligent decision-makers in behavioral planning, augmented with a safety verifier shield for contextual safety learning. We present two key studies in a simulated environment: an adaptive LLM-conditioned Model Predictive Control (MPC) and an LLM-enabled interactive behavior planning scheme with a state machine.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-28T03:13:09Z)
• No Trust without regulation! [0.0]
  The explosion in performance of Machine Learning (ML) and the potential of its applications are encouraging us to consider its use in industrial systems. It is still leaving too much to one side the issue of safety and its corollary, regulation and standards. The European Commission has laid the foundations for moving forward and building solid approaches to the integration of AI-based applications that are safe, trustworthy and respect European ethical values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-27T09:08:41Z)
• Safety Margins for Reinforcement Learning [53.10194953873209]
  We show how to leverage proxy criticality metrics to generate safety margins. We evaluate our approach on learned policies from APE-X and A3C within an Atari environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-25T16:49:54Z)
• Evaluating Model-free Reinforcement Learning toward Safety-critical Tasks [70.76757529955577]
  This paper revisits prior work in this scope from the perspective of state-wise safe RL. We propose Unrolling Safety Layer (USL), a joint method that combines safety optimization and safety projection. To facilitate further research in this area, we reproduce related algorithms in a unified pipeline and incorporate them into SafeRL-Kit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-12T06:30:17Z)
• AI at work -- Mitigating safety and discriminatory risk with technical standards [0.0]
  The paper provides an overview and assessment of existing international, European and German standards. The paper is part of the research project "ExamAI - Testing and Auditing of AI systems"
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-26T15:13:42Z)
• Regulating Safety and Security in Autonomous Robotic Systems [0.0]
  Rules for autonomous systems are often difficult to formalise. In the space and nuclear sectors applications are more likely to differ, so a set of general safety principles has developed. This allows novel applications to be assessed for their safety, but are difficult to formalise. We are collaborating with regulators and the community in the space and nuclear sectors to develop guidelines for autonomous and robotic systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-09T16:33:14Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.