mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

AI Hazard Management: A framework for the systematic management of root causes for AI risks

arXiv 2310.16727 ↗First posted 25 Oct 2023cs.LGcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent advancements in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) establish the basis to address challenging tasks. However, with the integration of AI, new risks arise. Therefore, to benefit from its advantages, it is essential to adequately handle the risks associated with AI. Existing risk management processes in related fields, such as software systems, need to sufficiently consider the specifics of AI. A key challenge is to systematically and transparently identify and address AI risks' root causes - also called AI hazards. This paper introduces the AI Hazard Management (AIHM) framework, which provides a structured process to systematically identify, assess, and treat AI hazards. The proposed process is conducted in parallel with the development to ensure that any AI hazard is captured at the earliest possible stage of the AI system's life cycle. In addition, to ensure the AI system's auditability, the proposed framework systematically documents evidence that the potential impact of identified AI hazards could be reduced to a tolerable level. The framework builds upon an AI hazard list from a comprehensive state-of-the-art analysis. Also, we provide a taxonomy that supports the optimal treatment of the identified AI hazards. Additionally, we illustrate how the AIHM framework can increase the overall quality of a power grid AI use case by systematically reducing the impact of identified hazards to an acceptable level.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Oct 2023.

Builds on

16 of 42 references.

References · 16

  1. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,364
  2. 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,917
  3. 2019Theoretically Principled Trade-off between Robustness and Accuracycited by 1,517
  4. 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,386
  5. 2020Closing the AI Accountability Gap: Defining an End-to-End Framework for Internal Algorithmic Auditingcited by 384
  6. 2020Fairness in Machine Learning: A Surveycited by 370
  7. 2017Certified Defenses for Data Poisoning Attackscited by 303
  8. 2019Explainable Machine Learning in Deploymentcited by 211
  9. 2020An Empirical Survey of Data Augmentation for Time Series Classification with Neural Networkscited by 128
  10. 2019Predictive Inequity in Object Detectioncited by 77
  11. 2016Understanding data augmentation for classification: when to warp?cited by 74
  12. 2021Guidance on the Assurance of Machine Learning in Autonomous Systems (AMLAS)cited by 42
4 more
  1. 2020Towards CRISP-ML(Q): A Machine Learning Process Model with Quality Assurance Methodologycited by 41
  2. 2020Safety Concerns and Mitigation Approaches Regarding the Use of Deep Learning in Safety-Critical Perception Taskscited by 31
  3. 2021Trusted Artificial Intelligence: Towards Certification of Machine Learning Applicationscited by 13
  4. 2021Corner case data description and detectioncited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

3 papers.

  1. 2024Landscape of AI safety concerns -- A methodology to support safety assurance for AI-based autonomous systemscited by 0
  2. 2025Standardized Threat Taxonomy for AI Security, Governance, and Regulatory Compliancecited by 0
  3. 2026From Legal Text to AI-specific Risk Sources: A Systematic Analysis of the EU AI Act's High-Risk Requirementscited by 0