mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

AI Deployment Accountability Engineering: A Vision for Accountable AI in Safety-Critical Socio-Technical Systems

arXiv 2609.14592 ↗First posted 13 Sep 2026cs.AI cs.CR cs.CYcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Artificial intelligence systems are rapidly becoming critical components in healthcare, finance, public services, and other safety-critical domains. Yet the engineering practices used to evaluate these systems remain predominantly model-centric, emphasizing properties such as accuracy, robustness, fairness, and interpretability before deployment. These properties are necessary but insufficient once an AI system operates within an ever changing socio-technical environment characterized by distribution shifts, institutional constraints, human feedback loops, privacy requirements, and interactions among multiple AI agents. This vision paper introduces AI Deployment Accountability Engineering (ADAE), a proposed AI engineering subdiscipline concerned with establishing measurable, continuous, and actionable accountability for deployed AI systems. ADAE treats accountability as a deployment-layer property rather than solely as a property of an individual model. It seeks to determine whether an AI-enabled system continues to operate within acceptable risk limits, identify the contexts in which failures emerge, attribute failures across interacting technical and human components, translate technical failures into downstream consequences, and support timely intervention. We articulate a research agenda built around four interconnected pillars: structured discovery of context-dependent failure modes, privacy-preserving accountability measurement, system-level risk analysis for agentic AI, and translation of technical failures into operational, and institutional risks. The broader goal is to establish foundational principles, mathematical tools, and system architectures for accountable AI deployment across safety-critical applications.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 3 of its 13 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Sep 2026.

Builds on

3 of 13 references.

References · 3

  1. 2020Learning under Concept Drift: A Reviewcited by 477
  2. 2025HealthBench: Evaluating Large Language Models Towards Improved Human Healthcited by 429
  3. 2022Bayesian Causal Inference: A Critical Reviewcited by 21

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026The safety failures we are not instrumenting: a perspective on hidden safety-critical challenges in modern AI systems
  2. 2026No One to Blame: A Framework of Constitutive AI Unaccountability
  3. 2025Safety by Measurement: A Systematic Literature Review of AI Safety Evaluation Methods
  4. 2026The Missing Layer: Specification Infrastructure for AI Oversight ↗
  5. 2026Beyond single-channel agentic benchmarking
  6. 2026Toward Safe and Responsible AI Agents: A Three-Pillar Model for Transparency, Accountability, and Trustworthiness
  7. 2026Reliability Engineering for AI Systems: Challenges, Methods, and Directions
  8. 2025From Failure Modes to Reliability Awareness in Generative and Agentic AI System