Trustworthy AI Suffers from Invariance Conflicts and Causality is The Solution
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.02640v1
- Date: Mon, 04 May 2026 14:26:28 GMT
- Title: Trustworthy AI Suffers from Invariance Conflicts and Causality is The Solution
- Abstract summary: 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.
- Score: 80.98492754957466
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: As artificial intelligence (AI), including machine learning (ML) models and foundation models (FMs), is increasingly deployed in high-stakes domains, ensuring their trustworthiness has become a central challenge. However, the core trustworthy AI objectives, such as fairness, robustness, privacy, and explainability, are hard to achieve simultaneously, especially while preserving utility. This position paper argues that causality is necessary to understand and balance trade-offs in performance and multiple objectives of trustworthy AI. We ground our arguments in re-interpreting trustworthy AI trade-offs as incompatible invariance requirements under different changes to the data-generating process. We then illustrate that causality provides a unifying framework for understanding how trade-offs in trustworthy AI arise, and how they can be softened or resolved through selective invariance. This perspective applies to both classical ML models and large-scale FMs. Our paper discusses how causal assumptions may be applied explicitly or implicitly in modern large-scale systems. Finally, we outline open challenges and opportunities for using causality to build more trustworthy AI.
Related papers
- Trustworthy Machine Learning under Distribution Shifts [8.366824976517272]
Motivated by these challenges, my research focuses on textitTrustworthy Machine Learning under Distribution Shifts<n>We study the three common distribution shifts into: (1) Perturbation Shift, (2) Domain Shift, and (3) Modality Shift.<n>Based on these dimensions, we propose effective solutions and fundamental insights, aiming to enhance the critical ML problems, such as efficiency, adaptability, and safety.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-29T15:02:59Z) - A Conjecture on a Fundamental Trade-Off between Certainty and Scope in Symbolic and Generative AI [0.0]
Article introduces a conjecture that formalises a fundamental trade-off between provable correctness and broad data-mapping capacity in AI systems.<n>By making this implicit trade-off explicit and open to rigorous verification, the conjecture significantly reframes both engineering ambitions and philosophical expectations for AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-11T19:18:13Z) - Causality Is Key to Understand and Balance Multiple Goals in Trustworthy ML and Foundation Models [91.24296813969003]
This paper advocates integrating causal methods into machine learning to navigate the trade-offs among key principles of trustworthy ML.<n>We argue that a causal approach is essential for balancing multiple competing objectives in both trustworthy ML and foundation models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-28T14:57:33Z) - 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 Review of the Role of Causality in Developing Trustworthy AI Systems [16.267806768096026]
State-of-the-art AI models largely lack an understanding of the cause-effect relationship that governs human understanding of the real world.
Recently, causal modeling and inference methods have emerged as powerful tools to improve the trustworthiness aspects of AI models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-14T11:08:26Z) - Never trust, always verify : a roadmap for Trustworthy AI? [12.031113181911627]
We examine trust in the context of AI-based systems to understand what it means for an AI system to be trustworthy.
We suggest a trust (resp. zero-trust) model for AI and suggest a set of properties that should be satisfied to ensure the trustworthiness of AI systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-23T21:13:10Z) - 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) - Formalizing Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Prerequisites, Causes and
Goals of Human Trust in AI [55.4046755826066]
We discuss a model of trust inspired by, but not identical to, sociology's interpersonal trust (i.e., trust between people)
We incorporate a formalization of 'contractual trust', such that trust between a user and an AI is trust that some implicit or explicit contract will hold.
We discuss how to design trustworthy AI, how to evaluate whether trust has manifested, and whether it is warranted.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-10-15T03:07:23Z) - Effect of Confidence and Explanation on Accuracy and Trust Calibration
in AI-Assisted Decision Making [53.62514158534574]
We study whether features that reveal case-specific model information can calibrate trust and improve the joint performance of the human and AI.
We show that confidence score can help calibrate people's trust in an AI model, but trust calibration alone is not sufficient to improve AI-assisted decision making.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-01-07T15:33:48Z)
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.