REVIEW 2 cited by
Estimating the Brittleness of AI: Safety Integrity Levels and the Need for Testing Out-Of-Distribution Performance
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Test, Evaluation, Verification, and Validation (TEVV) for Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a challenge that threatens to limit the economic and societal rewards that AI researchers have devoted themselves to producing. A central task of TEVV for AI is estimating brittleness, where brittleness implies that the system functions well within some bounds and poorly outside of those bounds. This paper argues that neither of those criteria are certain of Deep Neural Networks. First, highly touted AI successes (eg. image classification and speech recognition) are orders of magnitude more failure-prone than are typically certified in critical systems even within design bounds (perfectly in-distribution sampling). Second, performance falls off only gradually as inputs become further Out-Of-Distribution (OOD). Enhanced emphasis is needed on designing systems that are resilient despite failure-prone AI components as well as on evaluating and improving OOD performance in order to get AI to where it can clear the challenging hurdles of TEVV and certification.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
The Impact of AI on the Cyber Offense-Defense Balance and the Character of Cyber Conflict
After reviewing 66 arguments about cyber conflict, the paper concludes AI's effect on the offense-defense balance is mixed and lists 44 pathways through which AI could change cyber conflict.
-
Gradient-Optimized Fuzzy Classifier: A Benchmark Study Against State-of-the-Art Models
The paper reports a gradient-optimized fuzzy classifier that performs competitively on five UCI datasets, but the uncontrolled benchmark comparison and missing model details undermine the claim.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.