As Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems become increasingly integrated into critical digital infrastructure—such as power grids, telecommunications, and transportation systems—ensuring safety and accountability is paramount. The rapid deployment of AI has undoubtedly brought immense benefits, but it also comes with significant risks. AI systems can fail unexpectedly, causing harm to both individuals and infrastructure. In such cases, understanding the causes, consequences, and severity of incidents becomes crucial for improving future AI deployments and preventing similar issues.

In this context, a standardized AI incident reporting framework becomes essential. AI incidents need to be documented systematically, enabling detailed analysis to learn from past failures and improve incident management. Unfortunately, existing databases lack the consistency and granularity necessary for effective analysis, making it difficult to understand AI's true impact in sensitive sectors. In response, Avinash Agarwal has proposed a new solution—a standardized schema and taxonomy for AI incident databases that would facilitate consistent data collection and analysis.

This blog dives into the importance of a standardized framework for AI incident reporting, how it can enhance AI safety and accountability, and the role it plays in ensuring trust in AI systems.

The Need for a Standardized Framework in AI Incident Reporting

AI incidents, especially in critical infrastructure, can have far-reaching consequences. Whether it’s an AI failure that causes a power outage, an algorithmic bias in automated hiring systems, or a privacy breach due to flawed AI models, these incidents require proper documentation. Without standardized reporting, it becomes difficult to:

• Analyze trends in AI incidents across different sectors.
• Identify vulnerabilities and common causes of failures.
• Compare data across regions or industries, hindering the development of effective safety protocols.
• Implement evidence-based policymaking to regulate the use of AI in critical infrastructure.

Unfortunately, current AI incident databases, such as the AI Incident Database (AIID) and the AI, Algorithmic, and Autonomous Incident Classification (AIAAIC) Repository, have several shortcomings. These databases differ significantly in their structure, the fields they capture, and their taxonomy, making it nearly impossible to aggregate data across various sectors. This lack of standardization limits their usefulness in understanding the causes and impact of AI-related incidents and formulating preventative measures.

The Proposed Solution: A Unified Schema and Taxonomy

To overcome these challenges, Avinash Agarwal and his colleagues have proposed a standardized schema and taxonomy for AI incident databases in critical digital infrastructure. This framework is designed to improve the collection, documentation, and analysis of AI-related incidents by introducing:

• Detailed fields such as incident severity, causes, and harms caused.
• A taxonomy for classifying AI incidents, ensuring consistency in categorization across sectors.
• A unified reporting mechanism that captures granular data for effective analysis.

Key Components of the Standardized Schema:

1. Incident Severity: A clear categorization of the severity of the incident, ranging from minor issues to catastrophic failures. This helps prioritize incident responses and allocate resources more effectively.

2. Causes: Documenting the underlying causes of AI incidents—whether they are technical failures, algorithmic errors, or human factors—can provide invaluable insights for mitigation strategies.

3. Harms Caused: A field to categorize the harm caused by the incident, including impacts on individuals (e.g., health), organizations (e.g., financial loss), and society (e.g., ethical concerns).

4. Taxonomy: The proposed taxonomy includes various categories for incidents, allowing for better organization and classification. This ensures that each incident is accurately recorded and categorized, helping to identify trends and root causes.

The Role of a Taxonomy in AI Incident Reporting

The lack of a unified taxonomy in existing incident databases has been a major roadblock to effective data analysis. Different databases classify incidents using different criteria, making cross-referencing and trend analysis difficult. By introducing a standardized taxonomy, the proposed framework allows for the following benefits:

• Consistency: Incidents can be classified uniformly across sectors, regions, and databases.
• Clarity: The taxonomy provides clear guidelines on how to categorize various types of AI incidents.
• Actionable Insights: A standardized classification system makes it easier to analyze incidents, identify common patterns, and develop targeted solutions.

Why This Standardized Schema is Crucial for Critical Infrastructure

AI systems used in critical infrastructure—such as those in telecommunications, energy, healthcare, and transportation—have a direct impact on public safety and well-being. A failure in any of these systems can lead to significant harm, ranging from power grid failures to compromised national security. Therefore, understanding the risks and minimizing potential failures is crucial.

With the proposed standardized schema and taxonomy, AI incident databases can:

• Facilitate cross-sector analysis: The standardized structure allows data from different industries (e.g., energy, healthcare, and transportation) to be compared, helping regulators and industry leaders identify shared risks and vulnerabilities.
• Support regulatory frameworks: Governments can use the structured data to inform policy decisions, set safety standards, and ensure compliance with AI regulations.
• Enhance AI safety: By consistently documenting and analyzing AI failures, stakeholders can identify the root causes of incidents, develop better mitigation strategies, and ensure that AI systems in critical infrastructure are safe, reliable, and accountable.

Existing Databases and Their Limitations

While there are several AI incident databases already in place, such as AIAAIC and AIID, they suffer from significant structural discrepancies. These discrepancies include:

• Incompatible schemas: Different databases capture different fields, making it difficult to aggregate data for global analysis.
• Insufficient granularity: Many databases do not capture the level of detail needed for thorough analysis, such as the causes, context, and severity of incidents.
• Lack of a unified taxonomy: Each database uses its own system for categorizing incidents, leading to confusion and inconsistency in the data.

For example, the AIAAIC Repository emphasizes broader impacts like job displacement and environmental damage, but it lacks specific fields for categorizing the technology or application involved. On the other hand, the AIID focuses more on real-world harms but misses detailed data fields related to the affected parties, impacted sectors, and specific causes of the incidents.

Table: Data Fields in AIAAIC vs AIID

The standardized schema proposed by Agarwal addresses these gaps by providing consistent fields across databases, ensuring that AI incidents can be classified and analyzed effectively.

Conclusion: The Path Forward

As AI systems continue to play a larger role in critical infrastructure, the need for a robust, standardized AI incident reporting framework becomes increasingly urgent. The standardized schema and taxonomy proposed in this study represent a significant step toward more effective AI incident management. By improving the consistency, granularity, and categorization of AI incident data, this framework will empower policymakers, regulators, and industry leaders to make informed decisions that enhance safety, accountability, and trust in AI systems.

The adoption of this standardized approach will facilitate cross-sector collaboration, improve incident mitigation strategies, and help regulate AI systems in a way that ensures public safety and well-being. As the world continues to embrace AI technologies, creating a coordinated, transparent, and actionable framework for AI incident reporting is crucial for the responsible and safe use of AI in critical infrastructure.

Stay Updated: Interested in the future of AI regulation and safety? Subscribe to our blog for more insights into the latest advancements in responsible AI practices.

Join the Conversation: What are your thoughts on the need for standardized AI incident reporting? Share your insights in the comments below or connect with us on social media!