Trustworthiness in Digital Twin Systems: Systematic Review and Research Horizons

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.08208v1
• Date: Wed, 06 May 2026 09:04:00 GMT
• Title: Trustworthiness in Digital Twin Systems: Systematic Review and Research Horizons
• Abstract summary: Seven trust-related challenges and seven trust-enhancing strategies were defined to guide the analysis.<n>Four integration types, including human-centred, safety-critical, context-specific, and technologically-driven, were identified.<n>Preliminary directions for future research were proposed.
• Score: 0.3364554138758565
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Digital Twins (DTs) are increasingly deployed across application domains, yet the treatment of trust-related issues remains unevenly addressed. To examine whether and how trust is discussed in the current landscape, we conducted a systematic review of existing DT review papers and a mapping of their abstracts. Seven trust-related challenges and seven trust-enhancing strategies were defined to guide the analysis, enabling the trust focus of each paper to be characterised. By aggregating the challenges and strategies referenced across domains, distinct patterns of emphasis were observed. With certain domains consistently sharing similar spectrum of trust concerns, four integration types, including human-centred, safety-critical, context-specific, and technologically-driven, were identified as emergent categories reflecting how trust is prioritised in different deployment contexts. Drawing on the characteristics of these types, several preliminary directions for future research were proposed. These include the development of trust-by-design principles to inform early-stage decision-making, the inclusion of trust metadata in platform schemas to prompt systematic developer consideration of trust factors, and the exploration of how architectural choices, such as federated DTs, influence user trust.

Related papers

• Towards trustworthy agentic AI: a comprehensive survey of safety, robustness, privacy, and system security [57.35851886874902]
  Agentic AI systems execute complex tasks autonomously, but their multi-step trajectories introduce new failure modes that challenge trustworthiness.<n>This survey provides a focused examination of trustworthy agentic AI through two core dimensions that are critical for high-risk deployments.<n>For each dimension, we clarify key concepts, identify where risks emerge along the agent workflow, and summarize stage-targeted mitigation strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T10:26:37Z)
• ERA: Evidence-based Reliability Alignment for Honest Retrieval-Augmented Generation [19.616905640490252]
  We propose a new framework called ERA (Evidence-based Reliability Alignment) to enhance abstention behavior in RAG systems.<n>Our approach significantly outperforms baselines, optimizing the trade-off between answer coverage and abstention with superior calibration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-24T01:45:51Z)
• DATABench: Evaluating Dataset Auditing in Deep Learning from an Adversarial Perspective [70.77570343385928]
  We introduce a novel taxonomy, classifying existing methods based on their reliance on internal features (IF) (inherent to the data) versus external features (EF) (artificially introduced for auditing)<n>We formulate two primary attack types: evasion attacks, designed to conceal the use of a dataset, and forgery attacks, intending to falsely implicate an unused dataset.<n>Building on the understanding of existing methods and attack objectives, we further propose systematic attack strategies: decoupling, removal, and detection for evasion; adversarial example-based methods for forgery.<n>Our benchmark, DATABench, comprises 17 evasion attacks, 5 forgery attacks, and 9
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-08T03:07:15Z)
• Human-AI Governance (HAIG): A Trust-Utility Approach [0.0]
  This paper introduces the HAIG framework for analysing trust dynamics across evolving human-AI relationships.<n>Our analysis reveals how technical advances in self-supervision, reasoning authority, and distributed decision-making drive non-uniform trust evolution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-03T01:57:08Z)
• On the Trustworthiness of Generative Foundation Models: Guideline, Assessment, and Perspective [377.2483044466149]
  Generative Foundation Models (GenFMs) have emerged as transformative tools.<n>Their widespread adoption raises critical concerns regarding trustworthiness across dimensions.<n>This paper presents a comprehensive framework to address these challenges through three key contributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T06:20:36Z)
• Towards Trustworthy Retrieval Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Survey [92.36487127683053]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is an advanced technique designed to address the challenges of Artificial Intelligence-Generated Content (AIGC)<n>RAG provides reliable and up-to-date external knowledge, reduces hallucinations, and ensures relevant context across a wide range of tasks.<n>Despite RAG's success and potential, recent studies have shown that the RAG paradigm also introduces new risks, including privacy concerns, adversarial attacks, and accountability issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-08T06:50:47Z)
• On the Fairness, Diversity and Reliability of Text-to-Image Generative Models [68.62012304574012]
  multimodal generative models have sparked critical discussions on their reliability, fairness and potential for misuse.<n>We propose an evaluation framework to assess model reliability by analyzing responses to global and local perturbations in the embedding space.<n>Our method lays the groundwork for detecting unreliable, bias-injected models and tracing the provenance of embedded biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-21T09:46:55Z)
• A Systematic Review on Fostering Appropriate Trust in Human-AI Interaction [19.137907393497848]
  Appropriate Trust in Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems has rapidly become an important area of focus for both researchers and practitioners. Various approaches have been used to achieve it, such as confidence scores, explanations, trustworthiness cues, or uncertainty communication. This paper presents a systematic review to identify current practices in building appropriate trust, different ways to measure it, types of tasks used, and potential challenges associated with it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-08T12:19:58Z)
• Towards a multi-stakeholder value-based assessment framework for algorithmic systems [76.79703106646967]
  We develop a value-based assessment framework that visualizes closeness and tensions between values. We give guidelines on how to operationalize them, while opening up the evaluation and deliberation process to a wide range of stakeholders.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-09T19:28:32Z)

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.