Failure Modes of AI Systems in Regulated Environments A Systems Architecture Perspective

Authors

  • Naresh Bandaru

Keywords:

Artificial Intelligence, AI System Architecture, Failure Modes, Regulated Environments, Compliance Risk, Auditability

Abstract

Automated systems of artificial intelligence are gradually penetrating the controlled activities in finance, healthcare, and public services. A lot of the failures of these systems are considered as model or data failures. The thesis that is presented in this paper suggests that the majority of compliance failures are caused by flaws in the architecture of a system and not the errors in algorithms. The study is based on a quantitative, architecture-level analysis to find out the prevalence of failure modes in data pipelines, model lifecycle management, inference systems, and monitoring architectures. The findings indicate that there are evident trends between architectural design decisions and audit failures and audit governance risks. The paper brings out compliance-native architectural solutions which lessen risk by tracking, determinism and governance controls.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Manheim, D. (2019). Multiparty dynamics and failure modes for machine learning and artificial intelligence. Big Data and Cognitive Computing, 3(2), 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/bdcc3020021

Stadler, J. J., & Seidl, N. J. (2013). Software failure modes and effects analysis. Software Failure Modes and Effects Analysis, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/rams.2013.6517710

Kumar, R. S. S., O’Brien, D. R., Albert, K., Viljöen, S., & Snover, J. (2019). Failure modes in machine learning systems. arXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.1911.11034

Meng, D., Zhou, W., & Zhan, J. (2009). Multidimensional analysis of system logs in large-scale cluster systems. arXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.0906.1328

Güdemann, M., & Ortmeier, F. (2010). Probabilistic Model-Based Safety analysis. Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer Science, 28, 114–128. https://doi.org/10.4204/eptcs.28.8

Snee, R. D., & Rodebaugh, W. F. (2007). Failure Modes and Effects Analysis. Encyclopedia of Statistics in Quality and Reliability. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470061572.eqr411

Huang, G., Wang, W., Liu, T., & Mei, H. (2011). Simulation-based analysis of middleware service impact on system reliability: Experiment on Java application server. Journal of Systems and Software, 84(7), 1160–1170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2011.02.008

VPatil, M., & Yogi, A. M. N. (2011). Importance of data collection and validation for systematic software development process. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technology, 3(2), 260–278. https://doi.org/10.5121/ijcsit.2011.3220

Kaur, S., & Kumar, D. (2011). Quality prediction of object oriented software using density based clustering approach. In IACSIT International Journal of Engineering and Technology, IACSIT International Journal of Engineering and Technology: Vol. No.4. https://www.ijetch.org/papers/267-T781.pdf

Tekinerdogan, B., Sozer, H., & Aksit, M. (2007). Software architecture reliability analysis using failure scenarios. Journal of Systems and Software, 81(4), 558–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2007.10.029

Downloads

Published

30.12.2020

How to Cite

Naresh Bandaru. (2020). Failure Modes of AI Systems in Regulated Environments A Systems Architecture Perspective . International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering, 8(4), 409–416. Retrieved from https://ijisae.org/index.php/IJISAE/article/view/8012

Issue

Section

Research Article