Assurance of Frontier AI Built for National Security

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.08792v1
• Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2025 20:15:07 GMT
• Title: Assurance of Frontier AI Built for National Security
• Abstract summary: This memorandum presents four recommendations aimed at strengthening the principles of AI model reliability and AI model governability.<n>Our focus concerns the open scientific problem of misalignment and its implications on AI model behavior.<n>To address the national security threats arising from misalignment, we recommend that DoW and the IC strategically leverage existing testing and evaluation pipelines and their OT authority to future proof the principles of AI model reliability and AI model governability.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: This memorandum presents four recommendations aimed at strengthening the principles of AI model reliability and AI model governability, as DoW, ODNI, NIST, and CAISI refine AI assurance frameworks under the AI Action Plan. Our focus concerns the open scientific problem of misalignment and its implications on AI model behavior. Specifically, misalignment and scheming capabilities can be a red flag indicating AI model insufficient reliability and governability. To address the national security threats arising from misalignment, we recommend that DoW and the IC strategically leverage existing testing and evaluation pipelines and their OT authority to future proof the principles of AI model reliability and AI model governability through a suite of scheming and control evaluations.

Related papers

• Trustworthy AI Suffers from Invariance Conflicts and Causality is The Solution [80.98492754957466]
  Core trustworthy AI objectives, such as fairness, robustness, privacy, and explainability, are hard to achieve simultaneously.<n>This paper argues that causality is necessary to understand and balance trade-offs in performance and multiple objectives of trustworthy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-04T14:26:28Z)
• Incentive-Aware AI Safety via Strategic Resource Allocation: A Stackelberg Security Games Perspective [31.55000083809067]
  We show how game-theoretic deterrence can make AI oversight proactive, risk-aware, and resilient to manipulation.<n>We illustrate how this framework can inform (1) training-time auditing against data/feedback poisoning, (2) pre-deployment evaluation under constrained reviewer resources, and (3) robust multi-model deployment in adversarial environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-06T23:20:26Z)
• Governable AI: Provable Safety Under Extreme Threat Models [31.36879992618843]
  We propose a Governable AI (GAI) framework that shifts from traditional internal constraints to externally enforced structural compliance.<n>The GAI framework is composed of a simple yet reliable, fully deterministic, powerful, flexible, and general-purpose rule enforcement module (REM); governance rules; and a governable secure super-platform (GSSP) that offers end-to-end protection against compromise or subversion by AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-28T04:22:59Z)
• Rethinking Autonomy: Preventing Failures in AI-Driven Software Engineering [1.6766200616088744]
  SAFE-AI Framework is a holistic approach emphasizing Safety, Auditability, Feedback, and Explainability.<n>We introduce a novel taxonomy of AI behaviors categorizing suggestive, generative, autonomous, and destructive actions to guide risk assessment and oversight.<n>This paper provides a roadmap for responsible AI integration in software engineering, aligning with emerging regulations like the EU AI Act and Canada's AIDA.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-15T22:13:54Z)
• Never Compromise to Vulnerabilities: A Comprehensive Survey on AI Governance [211.5823259429128]
  We propose a comprehensive framework integrating technical and societal dimensions, structured around three interconnected pillars: Intrinsic Security, Derivative Security, and Social Ethics.<n>We identify three core challenges: (1) the generalization gap, where defenses fail against evolving threats; (2) inadequate evaluation protocols that overlook real-world risks; and (3) fragmented regulations leading to inconsistent oversight.<n>Our framework offers actionable guidance for researchers, engineers, and policymakers to develop AI systems that are not only robust and secure but also ethically aligned and publicly trustworthy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T09:42:56Z)
• Securing External Deeper-than-black-box GPAI Evaluations [49.1574468325115]
  This paper examines the critical challenges and potential solutions for conducting secure and effective external evaluations of general-purpose AI (GPAI) models.<n>With the exponential growth in size, capability, reach and accompanying risk, ensuring accountability, safety, and public trust requires frameworks that go beyond traditional black-box methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-10T16:13:45Z)
• Decoding the Black Box: Integrating Moral Imagination with Technical AI Governance [0.0]
  We develop a comprehensive framework designed to regulate AI technologies deployed in high-stakes domains such as defense, finance, healthcare, and education.<n>Our approach combines rigorous technical analysis, quantitative risk assessment, and normative evaluation to expose systemic vulnerabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-09T03:11:32Z)
• 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)
• A Nested Model for AI Design and Validation [0.5120567378386615]
  Despite the need for new regulations, there is a mismatch between regulatory science and AI. A five-layer nested model for AI design and validation aims to address these issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-08T12:46:12Z)
• 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)
• Developing trustworthy AI applications with foundation models [0.8005355048487703]
  The trustworthiness of AI applications has been the subject of recent research and is also addressed in the EU's recently adopted AI Regulation. Foundation models in the field of text, speech and image processing offer completely new possibilities for developing AI applications. This white paper shows how the trustworthiness of an AI application developed with foundation models can be evaluated and ensured.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-08T10:08:45Z)
• Testing autonomous vehicles and AI: perspectives and challenges from cybersecurity, transparency, robustness and fairness [53.91018508439669]
  The study explores the complexities of integrating Artificial Intelligence into Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) It examines the challenges introduced by AI components and the impact on testing procedures. The paper identifies significant challenges and suggests future directions for research and development of AI in AV technology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-21T08:29:42Z)
• Trustworthy AI [75.99046162669997]
  Brittleness to minor adversarial changes in the input data, ability to explain the decisions, address the bias in their training data, are some of the most prominent limitations. We propose the tutorial on Trustworthy AI to address six critical issues in enhancing user and public trust in AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-02T20:04:18Z)

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.