mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

From Failure to Alignment: A Requirements Engineering Framework for Machine Learning Systems

arXiv 2606.31589 ↗First posted 30 Jun 2026cs.SE cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Organisations designing, developing, and deploying machine learning systems (MLS) need to be able to check that these systems are trustworthy, and communicate this clearly to their stakeholders, be they different categories of users, engineers, or wider society. By focusing on stakeholders, Requirements Engineering is well positioned to drive the design and engineering of MLS that align with the needs of their stakeholders. Yet, we still need a systematic process for modelling and reasoning about requirements for MLS that is driven both by stakeholders' needs and constraints for MLS development. This paper proposes a framework entitled REAL (Requirements Engineering for mAchines that Learn - and Fail) to help develop MLS that align with stakeholders' needs by adopting a requirements engineering approach. This model-based framework is based on three principles. First, weaving together requirements for data, models, and the system as a whole. Second, using failure to drive the exploration of alternative requirements. Third, iterative and traceable refinement of MLS requirements. We demonstrate the proposed framework using an example from autonomous driving and show that REAL supports the development of MLS that better align with stakeholders' requirements. A replication package is available online.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 50 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Jun 2026.

Builds on

23 of 50 references.

References · 23

  1. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,364
  2. 2017CARLA: An Open Urban Driving Simulatorcited by 2,449
  3. 2020Underspecification Presents Challenges for Credibility in Modern Machine Learningcited by 496
  4. 2019Machine Learning Testing: Survey, Landscapes and Horizonscited by 218
  5. 2020Scenic: A Language for Scenario Specification and Data Generationcited by 40
  6. 2019Assuring the Machine Learning Lifecycle: Desiderata, Methods, and Challengescited by 39
  7. 2023Towards best practices in AGI safety and governance: A survey of expert opinioncited by 27
  8. 2023Trustworthy and Synergistic Artificial Intelligence for Software Engineering: Vision and Roadmapscited by 19
  9. 2019Failure Modes in Machine Learning Systemscited by 15
  10. 2022If a Human Can See It, So Should Your System: Reliability Requirements for Machine Vision Componentscited by 11
  11. 2023Requirements Practices and Gaps When Engineering Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence Systemscited by 8
  12. 2020Teaching Software Engineering for AI-Enabled Systemscited by 7
11 more
  1. 2022Quality issues in Machine Learning Software Systemscited by 7
  2. 2022Requirements Engineering for Machine Learning: A Review and Reflectioncited by 7
  3. 2023Tailoring Requirements Engineering for Responsible AIcited by 7
  4. 2023Requirements Engineering Framework for Human-centered Artificial Intelligence Software Systemscited by 7
  5. 2021Addressing the IEEE AV Test Challenge with Scenic and VerifAIcited by 5
  6. 2021Towards Artefact-based Requirements Engineering for Data-Centric Systemscited by 4
  7. 2022Simulator-based explanation and debugging of hazard-triggering events in DNN-based safety-critical systemscited by 4
  8. 2023Design Patterns for Machine Learning Based Systems with Human-in-the-Loopcited by 4
  9. 2023Test Generation Strategies for Building Failure Models and Explaining Spurious Failurescited by 4
  10. 2023CARLA-BSP: a simulated dataset with pedestrianscited by 3
  11. 2026Dynasto: Validity-Aware Dynamic-Static Parameter Optimization for Autonomous Driving Testingcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.