Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The authors formulate industrial AI reliability as a system-level structural alignment problem across four interacting spaces—physical reality, computational representations, machine models, and human cognition—bridged by digitalization and goal-encoding interfaces. Addressing the inadequacy of model-centric benchmark accuracy, this framework formally evaluates the admissible solution space along four core mathematical and operational properties: existence, non-uniqueness, robustness, and interpretability. Crucially, the work demonstrates that seemingly disparate failure modes across critical sectors—such as power grid instability, subsurface inversion ambiguity, and clinical uninterpretability—all originate from shared structural mismatches propagating across these interfaces.
Benchmark accuracy is dangerously blind to catastrophic industrial failures: whether an AI destabilizes a power grid or hallucinates subsurface geology, the breakdown traces back to the exact same structural mismatch between physical constraints, data representations, and encoded human intent.
Artificial intelligence is increasingly deployed in critical industrial domains, including healthcare, energy grids, subsurface exploration, where failures can have severe consequences for human safety, system stability, and economic outcomes. Yet AI is still evaluated primarily through benchmark accuracy, a model-centric metric that fails to capture the structural complexity and risks of real-world deployment. We propose a framework that views industrial AI reliability as a problem of structural alignment across four interacting worlds: physical, representational, machine, and human cognitive. These worlds are connected through two interfaces: digitalization, linking physical reality to computational representations, and goal encoding, translating human cognition to the machine objectives. Together, they define the space of admissible solutions. We characterize the solution space through four attributes: existence, non-uniqueness, robustness, and interpretability and show how mismatches arise at interfaces and propagate across worlds to produce reliability failures. Applications to healthcare, energy grids, and subsurface exploration illustrate that although dominant failure modes differ across domains, for example, interpretability in healthcare, robustness in energy grids, and non-uniqueness in subsurface exploration, all originate from a shared structural mechanism. By shifting the focus from model-centric evaluation to system-level alignment, this framework offers a principled foundation for assessing and governing reliability in industrial AI systems.