mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The Eticas AI Risk Taxonomy: Open Infrastructure for Operationalizing AI Audits

arXiv 2607.02201 ↗First posted 2 Jul 2026cs.CY cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The rapid deployment of AI systems across high-stakes domains has created urgent demand for standardized evaluation, yet the field remains fragmented across competing risk taxonomies that catalog risks without showing how an audit is executed. At least 74 AI risk taxonomies exist, and almost all stop at the catalog. The hard part of auditing is not naming a risk but operationalizing it: turning it into a test run against a real system, a measured value, a calibrated severity, and a defensible grade. This paper leads with that bridge. We present the operationalization layer Eticas has built and run, shown end to end on a single risk (PII leakage) against a public benchmark, and then the open taxonomy that makes the method scale. On GPT-4-0314, a disclosure risk that seven external frameworks require be controlled is measured at 0%, 51%, and 84% disclosure as adversarial conditioning increases, mapping through calibrated severity bands to a subcategory grade of E with a SYSTEMIC pattern. Around this example, the Eticas AI Risk Taxonomy v3.0.0 organizes 70 active subcategories across 10 categories and 21 sub-groups, with mappings to 18 external frameworks across compliance, reference, and academic tiers. Its established layer - categories, sub-groups, and the 32 established subcategories - is published under CC BY 4.0 as open semantic infrastructure with stable URIs and SKOS/JSON-LD distributions, and a worked subcategory example shows the operational layer down to its severity thresholds. The contribution is the demonstrated bridge from concept to graded finding, anchored by a clean separation of risks from the mechanisms by which they surface, and framed by an open-core model in which the conceptual scaffold is open and the methodology calibration is the practitioner layer. This is the infrastructure the AI auditing field needs: shared, open, and demonstrably operable.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jul 2026.

Builds on

10 of 24 references.

References · 10

  1. 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,371
  2. 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,068
  3. 2023DecodingTrust: A Comprehensive Assessment of Trustworthiness in GPT Modelscited by 505
  4. 2020Closing the AI Accountability Gap: Defining an End-to-End Framework for Internal Algorithmic Auditingcited by 380
  5. 2023Who Audits the Auditors? Recommendations from a field scan of the algorithmic auditing ecosystemcited by 49
  6. 2024AI Risk Categorization Decoded (AIR 2024): From Government Regulations to Corporate Policiescited by 34
  7. 2021Ethics-Based Auditing to Develop Trustworthy AIcited by 23
  8. 2024The AI risk repository: A meta-review, database, and taxonomy of risks from artificial intelligencecited by 13
  9. 2025AI Risk Atlas: Taxonomy and Tooling for Navigating AI Risks and Resourcescited by 7
  10. 2026AI Agents Under EU Lawcited by 5

Built on by

Not cited yet.