mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

MAIF: Enforcing AI Trust and Provenance with an Artifact-Centric Agentic Paradigm

arXiv 2511.15097 ↗First posted 19 Nov 2025cs.CR cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance

Abstract (arXiv)

The AI trustworthiness crisis threatens to derail the artificial intelligence revolution, with regulatory barriers, security vulnerabilities, and accountability gaps preventing deployment in critical domains. Current AI systems operate on opaque data structures that lack the audit trails, provenance tracking, or explainability required by emerging regulations like the EU AI Act. We propose an artifact-centric AI agent paradigm where behavior is driven by persistent, verifiable data artifacts rather than ephemeral tasks, solving the trustworthiness problem at the data architecture level. Central to this approach is the Multimodal Artifact File Format (MAIF), an AI-native container embedding semantic representations, cryptographic provenance, and granular access controls. MAIF transforms data from passive storage into active trust enforcement, making every AI operation inherently auditable. Our production-ready implementation demonstrates ultra-high-speed streaming (2,720.7 MB/s), optimized video processing (1,342 MB/s), and enterprise-grade security. Novel algorithms for cross-modal attention, semantic compression, and cryptographic binding achieve up to 225 compression while maintaining semantic fidelity. Advanced security features include stream-level access control, real-time tamper detection, and behavioral anomaly analysis with minimal overhead. This approach directly addresses the regulatory, security, and accountability challenges preventing AI deployment in sensitive domains, offering a viable path toward trustworthy AI systems at scale.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 6 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Nov 2025.

Builds on

6 of 41 references.

References · 6

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  2. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  3. 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,080
  4. 2016Efficient and robust approximate nearest neighbor search using Hierarchical Navigable Small World graphscited by 861
  5. 2025Agent Name Service (ANS): A Universal Directory for Secure AI Agent Discovery and Interoperabilitycited by 23
  6. 2025Securing GenAI Multi-Agent Systems Against Tool Squatting: A Zero Trust Registry-Based Approachcited by 18

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026PIPES: Securing Agent Perception with Provenance and Priors
  2. 2026MAP-Graph: Provenance-Aware Shared Memory for Multi-Agent Workflows
  3. 2026The Granularity Mismatch in Agent Security: Argument-Level Provenance Solves Enforcement and Isolates the LLM Reasoning Bottleneck
  4. 2026Authenticity Debt and the Synthetic Content Threat Landscape: A Layered Framework for Trust, Provenance, and IP Governance in the Generative AI Era
  5. 2026The LLMbda Calculus: AI Agents, Conversations, and Information Flow
  6. 2025Safe, Untrusted, "Proof-Carrying" AI Agents: toward the agentic lakehouse
  7. 2025Trustworthy AI in the Agentic Lakehouse: from Concurrency to Governance
  8. 2026AgentKernel: The Trust-Native Agentic Operating System