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.
By Niraj Kumar, Harsh Kasyap
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.
By Augustin Godinot, Sofiane Azogagh, Julien Ferry, S\'ebastien Gambs
arXiv:2607. 21839v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Privacy-preserving machine learning auditing protocols allow auditors to assess models for properties such as accuracy or fairness, without revealing their internals or training data.
By Carter Luck, Olive Franzese-McLaughlin, Elisaweta Masserova, Akira Takahashi, Antigoni Polychroniadou, Nicolas Papernot
arXiv:2607. 14315v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In this paper, we present a comprehensive framework for assessing the explainability of various XAI methods, such as LIME and SHAP, across multiple datasets and machine learning models, with the ultimate goal of creating a unified multidimensional explainability score.
By Georgios Makridis, Georgios Fatouros, Athanasios Kiourtis, Dimitrios Kotios, Vasileios Koukos, Dimosthenis Kyriazis, Jonh Soldatos
The paper introduces a framework for evaluating AI systems that not only checks final labels but also tracks the reasoning behind them through three core sources—grounds, norms, and authority—forming an eight-cell counterfactual judgment cube. It defines minimal source replacement sets, called judgment receipts, to explain changes in verdicts and provides certification cost bounds for black-box evaluators. The authors present ReasonBench, a benchmark with 19,520 cases, and demonstrate that while high standard accuracy can mask robustness issues, receipt accuracy reveals significant gaps in reasoning consistency across different models.
By Ye Chen, Weining Zhang
arXiv:2607. 08066v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) monitoring is a promising safety mechanism for AI agents, based on the premise that visible reasoning traces can surface misaligned or deceptive behavior.
By Jennifer Za, Julija Bainiaksina, Nikita Ostrovsky, Tanush Chopra, Victoria Krakovna
arXiv:2607. 25364v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Tool-using agents expose structured calls but commonly attach free-form rationales.
By Genliang Zhu (Accentrust, Georgia Institute of Technology), Chu Wang (Accentrust, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign)
arXiv:2603. 07466v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Cloud-based infrastructure has become the dominant platform for deploying large models, particularly large language models (LLMs).
By Heng Jin, Chaoyu Zhang, Hexuan Yu, Shanghao Shi, Ning Zhang, Y. Thomas Hou, Wenjing Lou
The paper argues that prediction‑based certifications—such as accuracy, calibration, and conformal coverage—are insufficient to guarantee trustworthy AI. It proves a separation theorem showing that a model can appear reliable under all prediction‑side certificates yet differ arbitrarily in explanation fidelity and deployment behaviour. The authors propose a competence envelope framework that combines both prediction and explanation certification to detect such hidden failures.
By Nataliya Shakhovska, Ivan Izonin, Stergios-Aristoteles Mitoulis
arXiv:2605. 06846v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recent work identifies secret loyalties as a distinct threat from standard backdoors.
By Alfie Lamerton, Fabien Roger
arXiv:2510. 06096v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The objectives that Large Language Models (LLMs) implicitly optimize remain dangerously opaque, making trustworthy alignment and auditing a grand challenge.
By Matthieu Bou, Nyal Patel, Arjun Jagota, Satyapriya Krishna, Sonali Parbhoo
arXiv:2607. 09682v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI systems are increasingly used to assist consequential decisions in regulated domains such as auditing, finance, and healthcare.
By Vimal Nakrani