Reliability Engineering for AI Systems: Challenges, Methods, and Directions
cs.AI, stat.AP
Submitted: 2026-09-28
Updated: 2026-09-28
Code: https://github.com/yili-hong/DR-AIR
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: AI reliability concerns whether an AI system performs its intended function dependably over a stated period and under stated operating conditions, with stated evidence.
Abstract
AI reliability concerns whether an AI system performs its intended function dependably over a stated period and under stated operating conditions, with stated evidence. As these systems become more autonomous, that function includes more than a correct output. Retrieval, memory, tool use, permissions, human oversight, and interactions among systems must operate consistently and safely, and, for generative systems, so must the reasoning process that produces the output. Average benchmark accuracy measures capability; it does not quantify this broader reliability claim. This paper adapts established reliability engineering methods, from failure definitions and operational envelopes to FMEA, accelerated testing, field monitoring, and reliability growth, to AI systems. A four-level diagnostic framework classifies failures as component, operational-loop, agentic-conduct, or network and governance failures. Test, evaluation, verification, and validation (TEVV), sequential monitoring, and FRACAS create and refresh evidence. SMART provides statistical guidance for measurement, analysis, assessment, and test planning; the NIST AI Risk Management Framework provides organizational guidance for governance, evaluation, monitoring, and mitigation. Three cases illustrate the program: adversarial testing of a convolutional neural network, perception-error propagation, and autonomous-vehicle disengagements. Established reliability engineering provides a usable foundation; new measurements and safety guardrails are still needed as these systems are self-evolving.
Sources
- On the Reliability Limits of LLM-Based Multi-Agent Planning
- Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback
- OrchestraBench: Evaluating Multi-Agent Orchestration Failure Modes, Recovery, and Decomposition Quality
- STRATUS: A Multi-agent System for Autonomous Reliability Engineering of Modern Clouds
- AgentDojo: A Dynamic Environment to Evaluate Prompt Injection Attacks and Defenses for LLM Agents
- Always-OnAgents:A Survey of Persistent Memory, State, and Governance in LLMAgents
- Memory Injection Attacks on LLM Agents via Query-Only Interaction
- The Last AI Built by Humans: Toward Genuine Recursive Self-Improvement
- Emergent Risks in Generative Multi-Agent Systems
- MemArchitect: A Policy Driven Memory Governance Layer
- One Success Isn't Reliability: Thinkingbox, a Sandbox and Benchmark for Agents in Stateful Business Workflows
- Agentic Configuration Management (ACM): A Reference Configuration Model for Governed Agentic Systems
- Consistency as a Testable Property: Statistical Methods to Evaluate AI Agent Reliability
- Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools
- Deployment Decision Reliability: A Generalizability-Theory Framework for Sizing Long-Horizon Agent Evaluations
- AgentChaos: Chaos Engineering for Agent Systems via Programmatic Fault Injection
- AutoGen: Enabling Next-Gen LLM Applications via Multi-Agent Conversation
- MasDrift: Benchmarking Authorization Preservation Across Multi-Agent Architectures
Related papers
- MAVEN-T: Reinforced Heterogeneous Distillation for Real-Time Multi-Agent Trajectory Prediction
- Model Discovery Agent: LLM-assisted Bayesian experiment design for data-efficient discovery of mechanistic world models
- Agents' Last Exam
- The Clinician's Veto: Navigating Trust, Liability, and Uncertainty in Autonomous AI Prescribing
- MindHelper: Closed-Loop Embodied Mental-State Reasoning for Precision Intervention
- Incumbent Advantage: Brand Bias and Cognitive Manipulation Dynamics in LLM Recommendation Systems