As AI systems become integral to critical operations across industries and services, ensuring their reliability and safety is essential. We offer a framework that integrates established reliability and resilience engineering principles into AI systems. By applying traditional metrics such as failure rate and Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) along with resilience engineering and human reliability analysis, we propose an integrate framework to manage AI system performance, and prevent or efficiently recover from failures. Our work adapts classical engineering methods to AI systems and outlines a research agenda for future technical studies. We apply our framework to a real-world AI system, using system status data from platforms such as openAI, to demonstrate its practical applicability. This framework aligns with emerging global standards and regulatory frameworks, providing a methodology to enhance the trustworthiness of AI systems. Our aim is to guide policy, regulation, and the development of reliable, safe, and adaptable AI technologies capable of consistent performance in real-world environments.

Artificial intelligence (AI), and especially its sub-field of Machine Learning (ML), are impacting the daily lives of everyone with their ubiquitous applications. In recent years, AI researchers and practitioners have introduced principles and guidelines to build systems that make reliable and trustworthy decisions. From a practical perspective, conventional ML systems process historical data to extract the features that are consequently used to train ML models that perform the desired task. However, in practice, a fundamental challenge arises when the system needs to be operationalized and deployed to evolve and operate in real-life environments continuously. To address this challenge, Machine Learning Operations (MLOps) have emerged as a potential recipe for standardizing ML solutions in deployment. Although MLOps demonstrated great success in streamlining ML processes, thoroughly defining the specifications of robust MLOps approaches remains of great interest to researchers and practitioners. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive overview of the trustworthiness property of MLOps systems. Specifically, we highlight technical practices to achieve robust MLOps systems. In addition, we survey the existing research approaches that address the robustness aspects of ML systems in production. We also review the tools and software available to build MLOps systems and summarize their support to handle the robustness aspects. Finally, we present the open challenges and propose possible future directions and opportunities within this emerging field. The aim of this paper is to provide researchers and practitioners working on practical AI applications with a comprehensive view to adopt robust ML solutions in production environments.

For an AI solution to evolve from a trained machine learning model into a production-ready AI system, many more things need to be considered than just the performance of the machine learning model. A production-ready AI system needs to be trustworthy, i.e. of high quality. But how to determine this in practice? For traditional software, ISO25000 and its predecessors have since long time been used to define and measure quality characteristics. Recently, quality models for AI systems, based on ISO25000, have been introduced. This paper applies one such quality model to a real-life case study: a deep learning platform for monitoring wildflowers. The paper presents three realistic scenarios sketching what it means to respectively use, extend and incrementally improve the deep learning platform for wildflower identification and counting. Next, it is shown how the quality model can be used as a structured dictionary to define quality requirements for data, model and software. Future work remains to extend the quality model with metrics, tools and best practices to aid AI engineering practitioners in implementing trustworthy AI systems.

We are witnessing the emergence of an "AI economy and society" where AI technologies are increasingly impacting health care, business, transportation and many aspects of everyday life. Many successes have been reported where AI systems even surpassed the accuracy of human experts. However, AI systems may produce errors, can exhibit bias, may be sensitive to noise in the data, and often lack technical and judicial transparency resulting in reduction in trust and challenges in their adoption. These recent shortcomings and concerns have been documented in scientific but also in general press such as accidents with self-driving cars, biases in healthcare, hiring and face recognition systems for people of color, seemingly correct medical decisions later found to be made due to wrong reasons etc. This resulted in emergence of many government and regulatory initiatives requiring trustworthy and ethical AI to provide accuracy and robustness, some form of explainability, human control and oversight, elimination of bias, judicial transparency and safety. The challenges in delivery of trustworthy AI systems motivated intense research on explainable AI systems (XAI). Aim of XAI is to provide human understandable information of how AI systems make their decisions. In this paper we first briefly summarize current XAI work and then challenge the recent arguments of "accuracy vs. explainability" for being mutually exclusive and being focused only on deep learning.

Science fiction movies like'The Terminator' and'I, Robot' have exhibited what might happen in case artificial intelligence goes rogue. Such dystopian fantasies about AI are widely discussed by experts and researchers in the field of AI as well. Many of these experts believe that super-intelligent AI systems will pose a significant threat to humanity in the near future. And, considering the untold potential of AI, this may soon become a reality. Developers need to understand public concerns over the development of AI systems. There have been many reported instances where developers neglected these warnings and created AI systems that went rogue.