Integrative Analysis of Risk Management Methodologies in Data Science Projects
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.02728v1
- Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2025 13:06:52 GMT
- Title: Integrative Analysis of Risk Management Methodologies in Data Science Projects
- Abstract summary: This study aims to conduct a comparative analysis of the main risk management methodologies applied to data science projects.<n>The study examines widely adopted risk management standards ISO 31000, PMBOK Risk Management and NIST RMF, as well as frameworks specific to data science.<n>The findings reveal that traditional approaches provide limited coverage of emerging risks, whereas contemporary models propose multidimensional structures.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Data science initiatives frequently exhibit high failure rates, driven by technical constraints, organizational limitations and insufficient risk management practices. Challenges such as low data maturity, lack of governance, misalignment between technical and business teams, and the absence of structured mechanisms to address ethical and sociotechnical risks have been widely identified in the literature. In this context, the purpose of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis of the main risk management methodologies applied to data science projects, aiming to identify, classify, and synthesize their similarities, differences and existing gaps. An integrative literature review was performed using indexed databases and a structured protocol for selection and content analysis. The study examines widely adopted risk management standards ISO 31000, PMBOK Risk Management and NIST RMF, as well as frameworks specific to data science workflows, such as CRISP DM and the recently proposed DS EthiCo RMF, which incorporates ethical and sociotechnical dimensions into the project life cycle. The findings reveal that traditional approaches provide limited coverage of emerging risks, whereas contemporary models propose multidimensional structures capable of integrating ethical oversight, governance and continuous monitoring. As a contribution, this work offers theoretical support for the development of hybrid frameworks that balance technical efficiency, organizational alignment and responsible data practices, while highlighting research gaps that can guide future investigations.
Related papers
- Open Problems in AI Risk Modeling: Insights from a Workshop on the Technical Foundations of AI Risk Modeling [0.0]
We investigate the design of robust risk models to assess societal risks posed by advanced AI systems.<n>We identify the key methodological and institutional challenges that currently limit the adoption of risk modeling.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-09-02T21:42:09Z) - Opportunities in AI/ML for the Rubin LSST Dark Energy Science Collaboration [63.61423859450929]
This white paper surveys the current landscape of AI/ML across DESC's primary cosmological probes and cross-cutting analyses.<n>We identify key methodological research priorities, including Bayesian inference at scale, physics-informed methods, validation frameworks, and active learning for discovery.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-20T18:46:42Z) - A Methodology for Quantitative AI Risk Modeling [32.594929429306774]
This paper advances the risk modeling component of AI risk management by introducing a methodology that integrates scenario building with quantitative risk estimation.<n>Our methodology is designed to be applicable to key systemic AI risks, including cyber offense, biological weapon development, harmful manipulation, and loss-of-control.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-09T17:34:59Z) - SHERLOCK: Towards Dynamic Knowledge Adaptation in LLM-enhanced E-commerce Risk Management [10.255396179168974]
E-commerce companies conduct risk investigations into suspicious cases to identify emerging fraud patterns.<n>The sheer volume of case analyses imposes a substantial workload on risk management analysts.<n>We propose the SHERLOCK framework, which leverages the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) to assist analysts in risk investigations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-10T02:57:58Z) - RADAR: A Risk-Aware Dynamic Multi-Agent Framework for LLM Safety Evaluation via Role-Specialized Collaboration [81.38705556267917]
Existing safety evaluation methods for large language models (LLMs) suffer from inherent limitations.<n>We introduce a theoretical framework that reconstructs the underlying risk concept space.<n>We propose RADAR, a multi-agent collaborative evaluation framework.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-28T09:35:32Z) - Unveiling Trust in Multimodal Large Language Models: Evaluation, Analysis, and Mitigation [51.19622266249408]
MultiTrust-X is a benchmark for evaluating, analyzing, and mitigating the trustworthiness issues of MLLMs.<n>Based on the taxonomy, MultiTrust-X includes 32 tasks and 28 curated datasets.<n>Our experiments reveal significant vulnerabilities in current models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-21T09:00:01Z) - Anomaly Detection and Generation with Diffusion Models: A Survey [51.61574868316922]
Anomaly detection (AD) plays a pivotal role across diverse domains, including cybersecurity, finance, healthcare, and industrial manufacturing.<n>Recent advancements in deep learning, specifically diffusion models (DMs), have sparked significant interest.<n>This survey aims to guide researchers and practitioners in leveraging DMs for innovative AD solutions across diverse applications.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-11T03:29:18Z) - Adapting Probabilistic Risk Assessment for AI [0.0]
General-purpose artificial intelligence (AI) systems present an urgent risk management challenge.<n>Current methods often rely on selective testing and undocumented assumptions about risk priorities.<n>This paper introduces the probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) for AI framework.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-25T17:59:14Z) - SoK: The Security-Safety Continuum of Multimodal Foundation Models through Information Flow and Game-Theoretic Defenses [58.93030774141753]
Multimodal foundation models (MFMs) integrate diverse data modalities to support complex and wide-ranging tasks.<n>In this paper, we unify the concepts of safety and security in the context of MFMs by identifying critical threats that arise from both model behavior and system-level interactions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-17T23:06:20Z) - Approaching Emergent Risks: An Exploratory Study into Artificial Intelligence Risk Management within Financial Organisations [0.0]
This study aims to contribute to the understanding of AI risk management in organisations through an exploratory empirical investigation into these practices.
In-depth insights are gained through interviews with nine practitioners from different organisations within the UK financial sector.
The findings of this study unearth levels of risk management framework readiness and prevailing approaches to risk management at both a processual and organisational level.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-08T20:28:22Z) - Application of the NIST AI Risk Management Framework to Surveillance Technology [1.5442389863546546]
This study offers an in-depth analysis of the application and implications of the National Institute of Standards and Technology's AI Risk Management Framework (NIST AI RMF)
Given the inherently high-risk and consequential nature of facial recognition systems, our research emphasizes the critical need for a structured approach to risk management in this sector.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-22T23:07:11Z) - GLUECons: A Generic Benchmark for Learning Under Constraints [102.78051169725455]
In this work, we create a benchmark that is a collection of nine tasks in the domains of natural language processing and computer vision.
We model external knowledge as constraints, specify the sources of the constraints for each task, and implement various models that use these constraints.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-16T16:45:36Z)
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.