CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.CYcs.AI2026-06-30

FLARE-AI: Flaw Reporting for AI

Shayne Longpre, Elaine Zhu, Carson Ezell, Avijit Ghosh, Sean McGregor, Kevin Paeth, Kevin Klyman, Sayash Kapoor, Rishi Bommasani, Ruth Appel, Gregory Strom, Lauren McIlvenny, Mark M. Jaycox, Peter Slattery, Nathan Butters, Arvind Narayanan, Percy Liang, Alex Pentland

Flaw reporting for deployed AI systems is fundamental to identifying system failures and improving AI safety. Yet the AI reporting ecosystem is fragmented: researchers who identify flaws often do not know what or where to report, and groups who receive reports rarely share them with other relevant stakeholders. As a result, good-faith reporters duplicate effort by submitting many different forms, and recipients lack standardized, triage-ready information. We audit 12 reporting systems published by AI developers, cybersecurity groups, and AI flaw aggregators, identifying five recurring design challenges spanning discoverability, scope, information collection, coordination, and guidance for strict-liability cases. Building on this analysis and feedback from 49 experts across 32 organizations representing developers, security researchers, and ecosystem coordinators, we introduce FLARE-AI, an open-source AI flaw reporting system designed for interoperability with existing systems. FLARE-AI streamlines flaw report creation by collecting triage-relevant information through conditional logic and early classification, then enables optional dissemination of standardized, machine-readable reports to multiple developers, coordinators, and incident registries from a single submission. By lowering barriers to reporting AI flaws and improving interoperability across stakeholders, FLARE-AI helps break down silos and accelerate remediation across the AI ecosystem.

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.CYcs.AIcs.CL2026-07-24

Opaque Epistemic Mediation: How LLM Deployment Configurations Shape the Validation of Pseudo-Science

Davide Scarso, Hugo Noronha de Almeida, Joaquim Pina

Commercial large language models are increasingly used as knowledge references, yet their stance on contested scientific claims is neither stable nor transparent. We tested how four major LLM families (Claude, Grok, GPT, Gemini) evaluate ethnonationalist pseudo-science derived fr…

View free PDFSource page