# On Specifying for Trustworthiness

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.11421 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.11421/

## Key facts

- Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 54 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 22 Jun 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [Underspecification Presents Challenges for Credibility in Modern Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.03395/) (2020)
- [The Role of Explainability in Assuring Safety of Machine Learning in Healthcare](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.00520/) (2021)
- [Towards a Framework for Certification of Reliable Autonomous Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.09124/) (2020)
- [Formalizing and Guaranteeing* Human-Robot Interaction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.16732/) (2020)
- [Trustworthy Autonomous Systems (TAS): Engaging TAS experts in curriculum design](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.07447/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 8 of 8)

- [Explainable Attribute-Based Speaker Verification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.19796/) (2024)
- [AERoS: Assurance of Emergent Behaviour in Autonomous Robotic Swarms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.10292/) (2023)
- [Assessing Trustworthiness of Autonomous Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03411/) (2023)
- [Autonomous Robotic Swarms: A Corroborative Approach for Verification and Validation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.15475/) (2024)
- [A Trustworthiness Score to Evaluate DNN Predictions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.08839/) (2023)
- [Soft Gripping: Specifying for Trustworthiness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.01159/) (2023)
- [RobEthiChor: Automated Context-aware Ethics-based Negotiation for Autonomous Robots](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.22664/) (2025)
- [Towards Continuous Assurance with Formal Verification and Assurance Cases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.14805/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

As autonomous systems (AS) increasingly become part of our daily lives, ensuring their trustworthiness is crucial. In order to demonstrate the trustworthiness of an AS, we first need to specify what is required for an AS to be considered trustworthy. This roadmap paper identifies key challenges for specifying for trustworthiness in AS, as identified during the "Specifying for Trustworthiness" workshop held as part of the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) Trustworthy Autonomous Systems (TAS) programme. We look across a range of AS domains with consideration of the resilience, trust, functionality, verifiability, security, and governance and regulation of AS and identify some of the key specification challenges in these domains. We then highlight the intellectual challenges that are involved with specifying for trustworthiness in AS that cut across domains and are exacerbated by the inherent uncertainty involved with the environments in which AS need to operate.