The AI Resilience Gap: Bringing Artificial Intelligence Inside the Operational Resilience Perimeter

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.07359v1
• Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2026 12:54:11 GMT
• Title: The AI Resilience Gap: Bringing Artificial Intelligence Inside the Operational Resilience Perimeter
• Abstract summary: We argue that AI adoption creates a resilience obligation distinct from, and inadequately covered by, the trustworthy AI stack.<n>We propose the AI Resilience Framework: a regime-agnostic method for bringing AI dependencies inside the operational resilience perimeter.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The rapid adoption of artificial intelligence across regulated firms has produced an extensive governance response oriented around trustworthiness: the EU AI Act, ISO IEC 42001, the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, and the United Kingdom's principles-based approach all address safety, fairness, transparency, and model risk. That response is necessary but incomplete. It does not, on its own, address operational resilience: the continuity of important business services under severe but plausible disruption, the substitutability of AI components, and the concentration of dependency on the small number of firms that supply frontier models. This paper argues that AI adoption creates a resilience obligation that is distinct from, and inadequately covered by, the trustworthy AI stack, and that United Kingdom financial authorities are already closing this gap through the Financial Policy Committee's systemic analysis, the Critical Third Parties regime, and the May 2026 joint statement on frontier AI and cyber resilience. We map the two regulatory logics, identify the structural gap between them, and propose the AI Resilience Framework: a regime-agnostic method for bringing AI dependencies inside the operational resilience perimeter through dependency mapping, a criticality-substitutability tiering, the extension of impact tolerances to AI-specific failure modes, an explicit fallback doctrine, and provider level concentration management. The framework gives chief information security officers, security architects, and boards an actionable route from AI governance policy to demonstrable resilience. This work extends a companion analysis of the United Kingdom cyber resilience regulatory stack into the artificial intelligence dimension.

Related papers

• From Frontier to Shadow AI: A Simmering Threat to Assurance and Security in Critical Infrastructure [8.167474882691755]
  We present the first empirical study of shadow AI in critical infrastructure environments.<n>We analyse how shadow AI manifests in practice, how it interacts with existing technical and governance controls, and the resulting security, assurance, and compliance risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-23T07:21:08Z)
• Resilience Meets Autonomy: Governing Embodied AI in Critical Infrastructure [0.9402398587785238]
  Critical infrastructure increasingly incorporates embodied AI for monitoring, predictive maintenance, and decision support.<n>However, AI systems designed to handle statistically representable uncertainty struggle with cascading failures and crisis dynamics.<n>This paper argues that Embodied AIs resilience depends on bounded autonomy within a hybrid governance architecture.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-16T20:28:02Z)
• Governing frontier general-purpose AI in the public sector: adaptive risk management and policy capacity under uncertainty through 2030 [0.0]
  Article argues that public governance for frontier AI should be based on adaptive risk management, scenario-aware regulation, and sociotechnical transformation.<n>It examines how AI adoption in government depends on organizational foresight, public-sector institutional dynamics, and data collaboration capacity.<n>It concludes that effective AI governance requires stronger policy capacity, clearer allocation of responsibility, and governance mechanisms that remain robust across divergent technological futures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-16T19:03:26Z)
• Making LLMs Reliable When It Matters Most: A Five-Layer Architecture for High-Stakes Decisions [51.56484100374058]
  Current large language models (LLMs) excel in verifiable domains where outputs can be checked before action but prove less reliable for high-stakes strategic decisions with uncertain outcomes.<n>This gap, driven by mutually cognitive biases in both humans and artificial intelligence (AI) systems, threatens the defensibility of valuations and sustainability of investments in the sector.<n>This report describes a framework emerging from systematic qualitative assessment across 7 frontier-grade LLMs and 3 market-facing venture vignettes under time pressure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-10T22:24:21Z)
• A cybersecurity AI agent selection and decision support framework [0.0]
  This paper presents a novel, structured decision support framework that aligns AI agent architectures, reactive, cognitive, hybrid, and learning.<n>By integrating agent theory with industry guidelines, this framework provides a transparent and stepwise methodology for selecting and deploying AI solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-02T07:38:21Z)
• Embodied AI: Emerging Risks and Opportunities for Policy Action [46.48780452120922]
  Embodied AI (EAI) systems can exist in, learn from, reason about, and act in the physical world.<n>EAI systems pose significant risks, including physical harm from malicious use, mass surveillance, as well as economic and societal disruption.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-28T17:59:07Z)
• 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)
• Artificial Intelligence in Government: Why People Feel They Lose Control [44.99833362998488]
  The use of Artificial Intelligence in public administration is expanding rapidly.<n>While AI promises greater efficiency and responsiveness, its integration into government functions raises concerns about fairness, transparency, and accountability.<n>This article applies principal-agent theory to AI adoption as a special case of delegation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-02T07:46:41Z)
• A Framework for the Assurance of AI-Enabled Systems [0.0]
  This paper proposes a claims-based framework for risk management and assurance of AI systems.<n>The paper's contributions are a framework process for AI assurance, a set of relevant definitions, and a discussion of important considerations in AI assurance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-03T13:44:01Z)
• Position: Mind the Gap-the Growing Disconnect Between Established Vulnerability Disclosure and AI Security [56.219994752894294]
  We argue that adapting existing processes for AI security reporting is doomed to fail due to fundamental shortcomings for the distinctive characteristics of AI systems.<n>Based on our proposal to address these shortcomings, we discuss an approach to AI security reporting and how the new AI paradigm, AI agents, will further reinforce the need for specialized AI security incident reporting advancements.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-19T13:50:26Z)
• The risks of risk-based AI regulation: taking liability seriously [46.90451304069951]
  The development and regulation of AI seems to have reached a critical stage. Some experts are calling for a moratorium on the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This paper analyses the most advanced legal proposal, the European Union's AI Act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:51:37Z)

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.