UGAF-ITS: A Standards Harmonization Framework and Validation Tool for Multi-Framework AI Governance in Distributed Intelligent Transportation Systems

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.22789v1
• Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2026 09:37:05 GMT
• Title: UGAF-ITS: A Standards Harmonization Framework and Validation Tool for Multi-Framework AI Governance in Distributed Intelligent Transportation Systems
• Abstract summary: UGAF-ITS is a standards harmonization framework that consolidates 154 source obligations into 12 unified controls across eight governance domains.<n>A three-tier operating model allocates each control to the vehicle, edge, or cloud tier where enforcement and defensible evidence production are feasible.<n>An evidence backbone of 20 versioned artifacts supports a single audit package across all three frameworks.
• Score: 1.1002771741647328
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Organizations deploying AI-enabled Intelligent Transportation Systems face fragmented governance: ISO/IEC 42001 demands a certifiable management system, the EU AI Act imposes binding high-risk obligations from August 2026, and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework structures voluntary practice. Each instrument is internally coherent, yet they drive different control vocabularies, evidence expectations, and audit rhythms. In distributed ITS deployments where vehicle manufacturers, roadside integrators, and cloud operators each hold partial evidence and partial accountability, this fragmentation multiplies compliance effort and obscures incident traceability. This paper introduces UGAF-ITS, a standards harmonization framework that consolidates 154 source obligations from the three instruments into 12 unified controls across eight governance domains through a reproducible five-phase crosswalk methodology. A three-tier operating model allocates each control to the vehicle, edge, or cloud tier where enforcement and defensible evidence production are feasible. An evidence backbone of 20 versioned artifacts supports a single audit package across all three frameworks without duplicating content. We validate UGAF-ITS through an open-source governance engine evaluated across four architecturally distinct ITS deployment scenarios. The engine encodes the complete crosswalk catalog and executes eight compliance computations. Three-tier deployments achieve 91.7% average framework coverage with 45.9% evidence reduction, complete bidirectional traceability, and 80% of artifacts serving all three frameworks simultaneously. Partial deployments degrade gracefully: coverage and reduction scale with architectural complexity. The tool, scenarios, and all reported results are publicly available for independent replication.

Related papers

• AspisAI: A Canonical, Machine-Interpretable Governance Framework for Automated Multi-Standard Compliance Monitoring [0.0]
  This paper presents emphAspisAI, a bounded, standard-agnostic governance framework that translates selected requirements into a canonical, machine-interpretable control model.<n>Within a bounded scope of 26 representative requirements, the framework is evaluated in a controlled simulation against five governance-oriented criteria.<n>Results include full requirement encoding, 88.5,% mapping coverage, complete traceability, and correct detection of all introduced gaps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-09T22:37:12Z)
• MetaRSI / RSI2: A Meta-Recursive Self-Improving System for Recursive Self-Improving Systems Themselves [65.60481414910728]
  Recursive self-improvement lets a system improve the model-building machinery from its own failures, so every later model inherits the gain.<n>Yet RSI has been validated almost exclusively on coding and formal benchmarks such as science QA and mathematics.<n>We argue RSI must next operate across real, diverse scientific, engineering, and meta-scientific domains, not where formal evaluation is merely tractable.<n>We present MetaRSI-v1, where improvement is the scheduled composition of three typed operators over one unified paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-06T05:15:31Z)
• Large Multimodal Agents for Intelligent Transportation Systems: Architectures, Evidence, and Deployment Challenges [10.296219658873676]
  This review provides an auditable evidence map of 42 primary study families released between January 2023 and 3 August 2026.<n>It distinguishes model-level, system-level, and hybrid multimodality and classifies each family by system architecture and action authority.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-08T15:22:40Z)
• AgentCompass: A Unified Evaluation Infrastructure for Agent Capabilities [55.23913617185508]
  Agent is an open-source, lightweight, and infrastructure for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs)-based agents.<n>It organizes the evaluation process around three independent components, namely Benchmark, Harness and Environment.<n>It features a fault-tolerant runtime and comprehensive trajectory analysis tools to transparently diagnose failure modes like reward-hacking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-15T11:11:17Z)
• Orchard: An Open-Source Agentic Modeling Framework [124.68499958175111]
  We present Orchard, an open-source framework for scalable agentic modeling.<n>At its core is Orchard Env, a lightweight environment service providing reusable primitives for sandbox lifecycle management.<n>On top of Orchard Env, we build three agentic modeling recipes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-14T16:35:12Z)
• From Specification to Deployment: Empirical Evidence from a W3C VC + DID Trust Infrastructure for Autonomous Agents [0.0]
  MolTrust is an open, portable, cryptographically verifiable trust infrastructure for autonomous agents.<n>This paper presents a production-deployed implementation of such an infrastructure built on W3C Verifiable Credentials 2.0 and Decentralized Identifiers v1.0.<n>The contribution is deployment-first evidence that the trust infrastructure regulators and industry have converged on is implementable today using W3C-standardized primitives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-07T14:09:51Z)
• TRUST: A Framework for Decentralized AI Service v.0.1 [47.384270414446604]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) and Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) in high-stakes domains demand reliable verification.<n>We introduce TRUST (Transparent, Robust, and Unified Services for Trustworthy AI), a decentralized framework with three innovations.<n>We prove a Safety-Profitability Theorem ensuring honest auditors profit while malicious actors incur losses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-29T19:32:58Z)
• Data Engineering Patterns for Cross-System Reconciliation in Regulated Enterprises: Architecture, Anomaly Detection, and Governance [0.0]
  This paper introduces the GERA Framework, a vendor-neutral, four-layer data architecture that integrates deterministic cross-system reconciliation.<n>The architecture spans four layers (ingestion, staging, core models, and semantic serving) following the multi-layer pattern now common in modern data platforms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-16T15:02:39Z)
• Claw-Eval: Toward Trustworthy Evaluation of Autonomous Agents [66.97968363332465]
  We introduce Claw-Eval, an end-to-end evaluation suite addressing all three gaps in agent benchmarks.<n>Claw-Eval comprises 300 human-verified tasks spanning 9 categories across three groups.<n>Every agent action is recorded through three independent evidence channels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-07T17:43:18Z)
• RAD-AI: Rethinking Architecture Documentation for AI-Augmented Ecosystems [1.2744523252873352]
  AI-augmented ecosystems are becoming the architectural norm for smart cities, autonomous fleets, and intelligent platforms.<n>Yet the architecture documentation frameworks practitioners rely on, arc42 and the C4 model, were designed for deterministic software.<n>We present RAD-AI, a backward-compatible extension framework that augments arc42 with eight AI-specific sections and C4 with three diagram extensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-30T17:48:56Z)
• Automated Self-Testing as a Quality Gate: Evidence-Driven Release Management for LLM Applications [51.56484100374058]
  We present an automated self-testing framework that introduces quality gates with evidence-based release decisions.<n>We evaluate the framework through a longitudinal case study of an internally deployed multi-agent conversational AI system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-13T20:44:15Z)
• Towards a Science of Scaling Agent Systems [79.64446272302287]
  We formalize a definition for agent evaluation and characterize scaling laws as the interplay between agent quantity, coordination structure, modelic, and task properties.<n>We derive a predictive model using coordination metrics, that cross-validated R2=0, enabling prediction on unseen task domains.<n>We identify three effects: (1) a tool-coordination trade-off: under fixed computational budgets, tool-heavy tasks suffer disproportionately from multi-agent overhead, and (2) a capability saturation: coordination yields diminishing or negative returns once single-agent baselines exceed 45%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-09T06:52:21Z)
• OmniEAR: Benchmarking Agent Reasoning in Embodied Tasks [52.87238755666243]
  We present OmniEAR, a framework for evaluating how language models reason about physical interactions, tool usage, and multi-agent coordination in embodied tasks.<n>We model continuous physical properties and complex spatial relationships across 1,500 scenarios spanning household and industrial domains.<n>Our systematic evaluation reveals severe performance degradation when models must reason from constraints.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-07T17:54:15Z)

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.