arXiv:2507. 20708v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The rapid deployment of AI systems in high-stakes domains, including those classified as high-risk under the The EU AI Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689), has intensified the need for reliable compliance auditing.
arXiv:2610.01005v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As artificial intelligence is increasingly deployed, algorithmic unfairness has raised growing concerns and intensified demands for transparent fairnes...
arXiv:2608. 04365v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Audits have emerged as a critical instrument for algorithmic governance, providing a mechanism for external scrutiny and governance of machine learning models.
arXiv:2606. 30338v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: External evaluations are becoming increasingly central to the governance of AI systems.
arXiv:2608. 00566v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Post-hoc model explainers such as LIME, SHAP, and Integrated Gradients are widely deployed to audit models in high-stakes sensitive domains, including finance, healthcare, and social welfare.
arXiv:2609.40034v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Over the past decade, Machine Learning (ML) has been trained under dual objectives: minimizing prediction error via Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM)...
arXiv:2606. 01719v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Machine learning models trained on sensitive data can inadvertently leak population-level information about their training distributions -- a threat known as distribution inference attack (DIA).
arXiv:2608. 00568v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Fairness audits are increasingly mandated in high-stakes applications such as hiring, lending, and automated decision-making.
arXiv:2605. 07674v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Regulatory audits of AI systems increasingly rely on differential privacy (DP) to protect training data and model internals.
arXiv:2506. 06488v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: A key tool in developing safe AI models is \emph{data auditing}, i.
arXiv:2608. 16852v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Regulatory compliance monitoring in deployed language models is increasingly implemented as a legal and audit control, checking model outputs against written rules spanning data protection, healthcare, financial regulation, and platform policy.
The paper proposes Causal Evidentiary Governance (CEG), a framework that requires regulated institutions to maintain a versioned directed acyclic graph (DAG) separating allowable from disallowed causal pathways in high‑risk machine learning systems. CEG introduces the Causal Harm Rate to quantify prediction variation due to disallowed pathways and pairs each decision with a signed Decision‑Evidence Packet (DEP) that cryptographically links the prediction to the DAG and path‑specific attributions, enabling efficient inclusion proofs via a Merkle tree. Empirical validation on synthetic credit data and the German Credit dataset demonstrates that CEG more clearly isolates causal effects than traditional fairness metrics and that a proof‑of‑concept implementation shows operational feasibility with manageable performance tradeoffs.
arXiv:2603. 05175v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The rapid proliferation of AI applications has intensified debate on effective regulation of these black-box services.