An AI System Evaluation Framework for Advancing AI Safety: Terminology, Taxonomy, Lifecycle Mapping
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The advent of advanced AI underscores the urgent need for comprehensive safety evaluations, necessitating collaboration across communities (i.e., AI, software engineering, and governance). However, divergent practices and terminologies across these communities, combined with the complexity of AI systems-of which models are only a part-and environmental affordances (e.g., access to tools), obstruct effective communication and comprehensive evaluation. This paper proposes a framework for AI system evaluation comprising three components: 1) harmonised terminology to facilitate communication across communities involved in AI safety evaluation; 2) a taxonomy identifying essential elements for AI system evaluation; 3) a mapping between AI lifecycle, stakeholders, and requisite evaluations for accountable AI supply chain. This framework catalyses a deeper discourse on AI system evaluation beyond model-centric approaches.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Apr 2024.
Builds on
9 of 24 references.
References · 9
- 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,854
- 2023DecodingTrust: A Comprehensive Assessment of Trustworthiness in GPT Modelscited by 505
- 2023Don't Make Your LLM an Evaluation Benchmark Cheatercited by 194
- 2023Sociotechnical Safety Evaluation of Generative AI Systemscited by 154
- 2022Fairness Testing: A Comprehensive Survey and Analysis of Trendscited by 61
- 2023Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progresscited by 48
- 2024ShieldLM: Empowering LLMs as Aligned, Customizable and Explainable Safety Detectorscited by 48
- 2022Responsible AI Pattern Catalogue: A Collection of Best Practices for AI Governance and Engineeringcited by 20
- 2023Towards a Responsible AI Metrics Catalogue: A Collection of Metrics for AI Accountabilitycited by 16
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 4.
7 papers.
- 2024Machine Unlearning Doesn't Do What You Think: Lessons for Generative AI Policy and Researchcited by 14
- 2025The Measurement Imbalance in Agentic AI Evaluation Undermines Industry Productivity Claimscited by 13
- 2024Responsible AI Question Bank: A Comprehensive Tool for AI Risk Assessmentcited by 2
- 2025Safe for Whom? Rethinking How We Evaluate the Safety of LLMs for Real Userscited by 1
- 2024Standardization Trends on Safety and Trustworthiness Technology for Advanced AIcited by 0
- 2025A Conceptual Framework for AI Capability Evaluationscited by 0
- 2025AIAuditTrack: A Framework for AI Security systemcited by 0
- 2025AIAuditTrack: A Framework for AI Security system16 Dec 2025
- 2025Safe for Whom? Rethinking How We Evaluate the Safety of LLMs for Real Users11 Dec 2025
- 2025A Conceptual Framework for AI Capability Evaluations23 Jun 2025
- 2025The Measurement Imbalance in Agentic AI Evaluation Undermines Industry Productivity Claims1 Jun 2025
- 2024Machine Unlearning Doesn't Do What You Think: Lessons for Generative AI Policy and Research9 Dec 2024
- 2024Standardization Trends on Safety and Trustworthiness Technology for Advanced AI29 Oct 2024
- 2024Responsible AI Question Bank: A Comprehensive Tool for AI Risk Assessment2 Aug 2024