AIApr 5

Compliance-by-Construction Argument Graphs: Using Generative AI to Produce Evidence-Linked Formal Arguments for Certification-Grade Accountability

arXiv:2604.041037.9
AI Analysis

This addresses the need for traceable and auditable justifications in certification-grade systems, though it appears incremental as it builds on existing methods like assurance cases and RAG.

The paper tackles the problem of ensuring accountability and regulatory compliance in high-stakes decision systems by proposing a compliance-by-construction architecture that integrates Generative AI with structured formal arguments, resulting in a system that uses deterministic validation rules to prevent unsupported claims while accelerating argument construction.

High-stakes decision systems increasingly require structured justification, traceability, and auditability to ensure accountability and regulatory compliance. Formal arguments commonly used in the certification of safety-critical systems provide a mechanism for structuring claims, reasoning, and evidence in a verifiable manner. At the same time, generative artificial intelligence systems are increasingly integrated into decision-support workflows, assisting with drafting explanations, summarizing evidence, and generating recommendations. However, current deployments often rely on language models as loosely constrained assistants, which introduces risks such as hallucinated reasoning, unsupported claims, and weak traceability. This paper proposes a compliance-by-construction architecture that integrates Generative AI (GenAI) with structured formal argument representations. The approach treats each AI-assisted step as a claim that must be supported by verifiable evidence and validated against explicit reasoning constraints before it becomes part of an official decision record. The architecture combines four components: i) a typed Argument Graph representation inspired by assurance-case methods, ii) retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to draft argument fragments grounded in authoritative evidence, iii) a reasoning and validation kernel enforcing completeness and admissibility constraints, and iv) a provenance ledger aligned with the W3C PROV standard to support auditability. We present a system design and an evaluation strategy based on enforceable invariants and worked examples. The analysis suggests that deterministic validation rules can prevent unsupported claims from entering the decision record while allowing GenAI to accelerate argument construction.

Foundations

The foundational work for this paper's niche, ranked by how specifically the neighbourhood builds on it — not by global fame.

Your Notes