Enhancing Trust Through Standards: A Comparative Risk-Impact Framework for Aligning ISO AI Standards with Global Ethical and Regulatory Contexts

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.16139v1
• Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 00:44:20 GMT
• Title: Enhancing Trust Through Standards: A Comparative Risk-Impact Framework for Aligning ISO AI Standards with Global Ethical and Regulatory Contexts
• Authors: Sridharan Sankaran,
• Abstract summary: ISO standards aim to foster responsible development by embedding fairness, transparency, and risk management into AI systems.<n>Their effectiveness varies across diverse regulatory landscapes, from the EU's risk-based AI Act to China's stability-focused measures.<n>This paper introduces a novel Comparative Risk-Impact Assessment Framework to evaluate how well ISO standards address ethical risks.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As artificial intelligence (AI) reshapes industries and societies, ensuring its trustworthiness-through mitigating ethical risks like bias, opacity, and accountability deficits-remains a global challenge. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) AI standards, such as ISO/IEC 24027 and 24368, aim to foster responsible development by embedding fairness, transparency, and risk management into AI systems. However, their effectiveness varies across diverse regulatory landscapes, from the EU's risk-based AI Act to China's stability-focused measures and the U.S.'s fragmented state-led initiatives. This paper introduces a novel Comparative Risk-Impact Assessment Framework to evaluate how well ISO standards address ethical risks within these contexts, proposing enhancements to strengthen their global applicability. By mapping ISO standards to the EU AI Act and surveying regulatory frameworks in ten regions-including the UK, Canada, India, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Brazil-we establish a baseline for ethical alignment. The framework, applied to case studies in the EU, US-Colorado, and China, reveals gaps: voluntary ISO standards falter in enforcement (e.g., Colorado) and undervalue region-specific risks like privacy (China). We recommend mandatory risk audits, region-specific annexes, and a privacy-focused module to enhance ISO's adaptability. This approach not only synthesizes global trends but also offers a replicable tool for aligning standardization with ethical imperatives, fostering interoperability and trust in AI worldwide. Policymakers and standards bodies can leverage these insights to evolve AI governance, ensuring it meets diverse societal needs as the technology advances.

Related papers

• Towards Adaptive AI Governance: Comparative Insights from the U.S., EU, and Asia [0.0]
  This study conducts a comparative analysis of AI trends in the United States (US), the European Union (EU), and Asia.<n>It focuses on three key dimensions: generative AI, ethical oversight, and industrial applications.<n>The US prioritizes market-driven innovation with minimal regulatory constraints, the EU enforces a precautionary risk-based framework emphasizing ethical safeguards, and Asia employs state-guided AI strategies that balance rapid deployment with regulatory oversight.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-01T11:05:47Z)
• HH4AI: A methodological Framework for AI Human Rights impact assessment under the EUAI ACT [1.7754875105502606]
  The paper highlights AIs transformative nature, driven by autonomy, data, and goal-oriented design.<n>A key challenge is defining and assessing "high-risk" AI systems across industries.<n>It proposes a Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment (FRIA) methodology, a gate-based framework designed to isolate and assess risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-23T19:10:14Z)
• Between Innovation and Oversight: A Cross-Regional Study of AI Risk Management Frameworks in the EU, U.S., UK, and China [0.0]
  This paper conducts a comparative analysis of AI risk management strategies across the European Union, United States, United Kingdom (UK), and China. The findings show that the EU implements a structured, risk-based framework that prioritizes transparency and conformity assessments. The U.S. uses a decentralized, sector-specific regulations that promote innovation but may lead to fragmented enforcement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-25T18:52:17Z)
• AILuminate: Introducing v1.0 of the AI Risk and Reliability Benchmark from MLCommons [62.374792825813394]
  This paper introduces AILuminate v1.0, the first comprehensive industry-standard benchmark for assessing AI-product risk and reliability.<n>The benchmark evaluates an AI system's resistance to prompts designed to elicit dangerous, illegal, or undesirable behavior in 12 hazard categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-19T05:58:52Z)
• Engineering Trustworthy AI: A Developer Guide for Empirical Risk Minimization [53.80919781981027]
  Key requirements for trustworthy AI can be translated into design choices for the components of empirical risk minimization. We hope to provide actionable guidance for building AI systems that meet emerging standards for trustworthiness of AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-25T07:53:32Z)
• An Open Knowledge Graph-Based Approach for Mapping Concepts and Requirements between the EU AI Act and International Standards [1.9142148274342772]
  The EU's AI Act will shift the focus of such organizations toward conformance with the technical requirements for regulatory compliance. This paper offers a simple and repeatable mechanism for mapping the terms and requirements relevant to normative statements in regulations and standards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-21T18:21:09Z)
• AI Risk Categorization Decoded (AIR 2024): From Government Regulations to Corporate Policies [88.32153122712478]
  We identify 314 unique risk categories organized into a four-tiered taxonomy. At the highest level, this taxonomy encompasses System & Operational Risks, Content Safety Risks, Societal Risks, and Legal & Rights Risks. We aim to advance AI safety through information sharing across sectors and the promotion of best practices in risk mitigation for generative AI models and systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T18:13:05Z)
• AI Risk Management Should Incorporate Both Safety and Security [185.68738503122114]
  We argue that stakeholders in AI risk management should be aware of the nuances, synergies, and interplay between safety and security. We introduce a unified reference framework to clarify the differences and interplay between AI safety and AI security.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T21:00:47Z)
• Towards Responsible AI in Banking: Addressing Bias for Fair Decision-Making [69.44075077934914]
  "Responsible AI" emphasizes the critical nature of addressing biases within the development of a corporate culture. This thesis is structured around three fundamental pillars: understanding bias, mitigating bias, and accounting for bias. In line with open-source principles, we have released Bias On Demand and FairView as accessible Python packages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-13T14:07:09Z)
• The risks of risk-based AI regulation: taking liability seriously [46.90451304069951]
  The development and regulation of AI seems to have reached a critical stage. Some experts are calling for a moratorium on the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This paper analyses the most advanced legal proposal, the European Union's AI Act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:51:37Z)
• Bridging the Global Divide in AI Regulation: A Proposal for a Contextual, Coherent, and Commensurable Framework [0.9622882291833615]
  This paper proposes an alternative contextual, coherent, and commensurable (3C) framework for regulating artificial intelligence (AI) To ensure contextuality, the framework bifurcates the AI life cycle into two phases: learning and deployment for specific tasks, instead of defining foundation or general-purpose models. To ensure commensurability, the framework promotes the adoption of international standards for measuring and mitigating risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-20T15:23:40Z)

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.