mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Actionable Meta-Requirements for AI Robustness Auditing

arXiv 2610.14356 ↗First posted 9 Oct 2026cs.AI cs.SEcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

AI-enabled systems must remain dependable when the conditions under which they operate change (e.g., due to input perturbations, distribution shifts, or changes in external dependencies). This makes robustness auditing of such systems important for judging whether the available evidence is sufficient to support a defined robustness conclusion. However, designing an AI robustness auditing framework is challenging. A key unresolved issue is determining the requirements such a framework should support; these requirements have not yet been consolidated. We address this gap through meta-requirements: higher-order requirements specifying what a class of auditing frameworks should support. In design science research, literature and domain experts are common sources of meta-requirements; accordingly, we derive the initial set from literature and validate and refine it with practitioners. Our systematic literature review retained 74 of 2,890 records and derived 43 meta-requirements across 16 categories. We evaluated them with 128 practitioners, obtaining 5,504 ratings and 586 substantive comments. Overall, 81.20% of ratings indicated agreement or strong agreement. In particular, 41 of the 43 literature-derived meta-requirements were classified as strongly supported. Practitioner feedback refined the requirements and identified an additional requirement concerning external components and supply chain dependencies. The final set comprises 44 meta-requirements across 16 categories, of which 43 received quantitative validation. These meta-requirements can help organizations implement AI robustness auditing frameworks, assess existing frameworks for completeness, and refine them.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 41 of its 121 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Oct 2026.

Builds on

41 of 121 references.

References · 41

  1. 2019Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbationscited by 2,877
  2. 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,917
  3. 2020Measuring Robustness to Natural Distribution Shifts in Image Classificationcited by 454
  4. 2020Closing the AI Accountability Gap: Defining an End-to-End Framework for Internal Algorithmic Auditingcited by 384
  5. 2021Trustworthy AI: From Principles to Practicescited by 207
  6. 2023Auditing large language models: a three-layered approachcited by 137
  7. 2024Black-Box Access is Insufficient for Rigorous AI Auditscited by 126
  8. 2019A Survey of Deep Learning Applications to Autonomous Vehicle Controlcited by 106
  9. 2020Opportunities and Challenges in Deep Learning Adversarial Robustness: A Surveycited by 72
  10. 2021Software Engineering for AI-Based Systems: A Surveycited by 69
  11. 2021Assessing the Fairness of AI Systems: AI Practitioners' Processes, Challenges, and Needs for Supportcited by 63
  12. 2023Connecting the Dots in Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence: From AI Principles, Ethics, and Key Requirements to Responsible AI Systems and Regulationcited by 61
29 more
  1. 2020Fairness Through Robustness: Investigating Robustness Disparity in Deep Learningcited by 56
  2. 2023Who Audits the Auditors? Recommendations from a field scan of the algorithmic auditing ecosystemcited by 52
  3. 2022Accountability in an Algorithmic Society: Relationality, Responsibility, and Robustness in Machine Learningcited by 48
  4. 2017Guidelines for including grey literature and conducting multivocal literature reviews in software engineeringcited by 41
  5. 2021Robust Machine Learning Systems: Challenges, Current Trends, Perspectives, and the Road Aheadcited by 41
  6. 2022A Survey on Trustworthy Recommender Systemscited by 41
  7. 2022Visual correspondence-based explanations improve AI robustness and human-AI team accuracycited by 39
  8. 2024Towards AI Accountability Infrastructure: Gaps and Opportunities in AI Audit Toolingcited by 29
  9. 2021Taxonomy of Machine Learning Safety: A Survey and Primercited by 25
  10. 2024More than Marketing? On the Information Value of AI Benchmarks for Practitionerscited by 17
  11. 2024Trustworthy Distributed AI Systems: Robustness, Privacy, and Governancecited by 14
  12. 2023Angler: Helping Machine Translation Practitioners Prioritize Model Improvementscited by 12
  13. 2025Robustness and Cybersecurity in the EU Artificial Intelligence Actcited by 11
  14. 2024A Survey on Failure Analysis and Fault Injection in AI Systemscited by 10
  15. 2024Auditing of AI: Legal, Ethical and Technical Approachescited by 10
  16. 2020A Multi-Vocal Review of Security Orchestrationcited by 9
  17. 2021A Survey on End-User Robot Programmingcited by 6
  18. 2021Design, Monitoring, and Testing of Microservices Systems: The Practitioners' Perspectivecited by 6
  19. 2023The Adaptive Arms Race: Redefining Robustness in AI Securitycited by 5
  20. 2024Towards Trustworthy Machine Learning in Production: An Overview of the Robustness in MLOps Approachcited by 4
  21. 2022Software Engineering for Quantum Programming: How Far Are We?cited by 3
  22. 2024A Survey of Neural Network Robustness Assessment in Image Recognitioncited by 3
  23. 2024Towards Assuring EU AI Act Compliance and Adversarial Robustness of LLMscited by 3
  24. 2026Operationalising Artificial Intelligence Bills of Materials (AIBOMs) for Verifiable AI Provenance and Lifecycle Assurancecited by 3
  25. 2025Practitioner Insights on Fairness Requirements in the AI Development Life Cycle: An Interview Studycited by 2
  26. 2020Views on Quality Requirements in Academia and Practice: Commonalities, Differences, and Context-Dependent Grey Areascited by 1
  27. 2021Software Engineering for Internet of Things: The Practitioner's Perspectivecited by 1
  28. 2023Maestro: A Gamified Platform for Teaching AI Robustnesscited by 1
  29. 2025Trust and Transparency in AI: Industry Voices on Data, Ethics, and Compliancecited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.