Assurance for artificial intelligence (AI) systems remains fragmented across software supply-chain security, adversarial machine learning, and governance documentation. Existing transparency mechanisms - including Model Cards, Datasheets, and Software Bills of Materials (SBOMs) - advance provenance reporting but rarely provide verifiable, machine-readable evidence of model security. This paper introduces the AI Risk Scanning (AIRS) Framework, a threat-model-based, evidence-generating framework designed to operationalize AI assurance. The AIRS Framework evolved through three progressive pilot studies - Smurf (AIBOM schema design), OPAL (operational validation), and Pilot C (AIRS) - that reframed AI documentation from descriptive disclosure toward measurable, evidence-bound verification. The framework aligns its assurance fields to the MITRE ATLAS adversarial ML taxonomy and automatically produces structured artifacts capturing model integrity, packaging and serialization safety, structural adapters, and runtime behaviors. Currently, the AIRS Framework is scoped to provide model-level assurances for LLMs, but it could be expanded to include other modalities and cover system-level threats (e.g. application-layer abuses, tool-calling). A proof-of-concept on a quantized GPT-OSS-20B model demonstrates enforcement of safe loader policies, per-shard hash verification, and contamination and backdoor probes executed under controlled runtime conditions. Comparative analysis with SBOM standards of SPDX 3.0 and CycloneDX 1.6 reveals alignment on identity and evaluation metadata, but identifies critical gaps in representing AI-specific assurance fields. The AIRS Framework thus extends SBOM practice to the AI domain by coupling threat modeling with automated, auditable evidence generation, providing a principled foundation for standardized, trustworthy, and machine-verifiable AI risk documentation.

The United States Department of Defense (DOD) looks to accelerate the development and deployment of AI capabilities across a wide spectrum of defense applications to maintain strategic advantages. However, many common features of AI algorithms that make them powerful, such as capacity for learning, large-scale data ingestion, and problem-solving, raise new technical, security, and ethical challenges. These challenges may hinder adoption due to uncertainty in development, testing, assurance, processes, and requirements. Trustworthiness through assurance is essential to achieve the expected value from AI. This paper proposes a claims-based framework for risk management and assurance of AI systems that addresses the competing needs for faster deployment, successful adoption, and rigorous evaluation. This framework supports programs across all acquisition pathways provide grounds for sufficient confidence that an AI-enabled system (AIES) meets its intended mission goals without introducing unacceptable risks throughout its lifecycle. The paper's contributions are a framework process for AI assurance, a set of relevant definitions to enable constructive conversations on the topic of AI assurance, and a discussion of important considerations in AI assurance. The framework aims to provide the DOD a robust yet efficient mechanism for swiftly fielding effective AI capabilities without overlooking critical risks or undermining stakeholder trust.

The deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) applications has accelerated rapidly. AI enabled technologies are facing the public in many ways including infrastructure, consumer products and home applications. Because many of these technologies present risks either in the form of physical injury, or bias, potentially yielding unfair outcomes, policy makers must consider the need for oversight. Most policymakers, however, lack the technical knowledge to judge whether an emerging AI technology is safe, effective, and requires oversight, therefore policy makers must depend on expert opinion. But policymakers are better served when, in addition to expert opinion, they have some general understanding of existing guidelines and regulations. This work provides an overview [the landscape] of AI legislation and directives at the international, U.S. state, city and federal levels. It also reviews relevant business standards, and technical society initiatives. Then an overlap and gap analysis are performed resulting in a reference guide that includes recommendations and guidance for future policy making.

The increasing utilization of emerging technologies in the Food & Agriculture (FA) sector has heightened the need for security to minimize cyber risks. Considering this aspect, this manuscript reviews disclosed and documented cybersecurity incidents in the FA sector. For this purpose, thirty cybersecurity incidents were identified, which took place between July 2011 and April 2023. The details of these incidents are reported from multiple sources such as: the private industry and flash notifications generated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), internal reports from the affected organizations, and available media sources. Considering the available information, a brief description of the security threat, ransom amount, and impact on the organization are discussed for each incident. This review reports an increased frequency of cybersecurity threats to the FA sector. To minimize these cyber risks, popular cybersecurity frameworks and recent agriculture-specific cybersecurity solutions are also discussed. Further, the need for AI assurance in the FA sector is explained, and the Farmer-Centered AI (FCAI) framework is proposed. The main aim of the FCAI framework is to support farmers in decision-making for agricultural production, by incorporating AI assurance. Lastly, the effects of the reported cyber incidents on other critical infrastructures, food security, and the economy are noted, along with specifying the open issues for future development.

The Assured and Trustworthy Human-centered AI (ATHAI) symposium was held as part of the AAAI Fall Symposium Series in Arlington, VA from October 25-27, 2023. The symposium brought together three groups of stakeholders from industry, academia, and government to discuss issues related to AI assurance in different domains ranging from healthcare to defense. The symposium drew over 50 participants and consisted of a combination of invited keynote speakers, spotlight talks, and interactive panel discussions. On Day 1, the symposium kicked off with a keynote by Professor Missy Cummings (George Mason University) titled "Developing Trustworthy AI: Lessons Learned from Self-driving Cars". Missy shared important lessons learned from her time at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and interacting with the autonomous vehicle industry.

To support delivery of the Roadmap to an effective AI assurance ecosystem published in December 2021, the Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation (CDEI) launched its AI Assurance Programme. In its first year, the programme has focused on gaining a better understanding of current levels of industry engagement with AI assurance, to best focus the CDEI's work to ensure that we have the highest potential for impact. To achieve this, the CDEI has facilitated a series of events with stakeholders; this report summarises key findings from these activities. It identifies industry barriers and enablers to engage with AI assurance, and goes on to identify potential practical interventions to support increased uptake and adoption of AI assurance techniques and standards. The report also examines in more detail three sectors with a breadth of risks that are introduced by increased AI adoption.

The question has arisen with escalating frequency in recent years, a sort of journalistic thought bubble emerging from the collective consciousness of writers. Will artificial intelligence (AI) save humanity, or supplant us? On the one hand, we are told that AI holds the potential to solve some of the world's biggest problems -- challenges like poverty, food insecurity, inequality and climate change. On the other hand, some very smart people have issued warnings. Stephen Hawking said the technology could "spell the end of the human race."

Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms are increasingly providing decision making and operational support across multiple domains. AI includes a wide library of algorithms for different problems. One important notion for the adoption of AI algorithms into operational decision process is the concept of assurance. The literature on assurance, unfortunately, conceals its outcomes within a tangled landscape of conflicting approaches, driven by contradicting motivations, assumptions, and intuitions. Accordingly, albeit a rising and novel area, this manuscript provides a systematic review of research works that are relevant to AI assurance, between years 1985 - 2021, and aims to provide a structured alternative to the landscape. A new AI assurance definition is adopted and presented and assurance methods are contrasted and tabulated. Additionally, a ten-metric scoring system is developed and introduced to evaluate and compare existing methods. Lastly, in this manuscript, we provide foundational insights, discussions, future directions, a roadmap, and applicable recommendations for the development and deployment of AI assurance.