Certified in Theory, Broken in Practice: Assumption Gaps in Cryptographic Model Certification
Privacy-preserving machine learning auditing protocols allow auditors to assess models for properties such as accuracy or fairness, without revealing their internals or training data. This makes them especially attractive for auditing models deployed in sensitive domains such as healthcare or finance. For these protocols to be meaningful in real-world audit settings, though, their guarantees must reflect how the model will behave once deployed, rather than merely certifying its behavior during a
Record details
Published: 23 July 2026
Source: arXiv cs.CR (AI security)
Category: Research
Topics: Bias & fairness · Privacy · Healthcare · Transparency
Retrieved: 27 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Trustworthy Privacy-Preserving Multimodal Federated Learning for Personalised Breast Cancer Prediction
arXiv · 21 July 2026
Trustworthy AI in Digital Health: A Comprehensive Review of Robustness and Explainability
arXiv · 3 August 2026
FairHealth: An Open-Source Python Library for Trustworthy Healthcare AI in Low-Resource Settings
arXiv · 5 May 2026
Fairness Interventions in Classification: A Study on AI Explainability
arXiv cs.CY · 28 July 2026
A Computational Ethical Framework for Financial Digital Phenotyping for Mental Health
arXiv cs.CY · 28 July 2026
When AI Does the Work, What Is Learning For? Post-Instrumental Learning and the Risk of Capacity Dissolution
arXiv · 30 July 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (23 July 2026), “Certified in Theory, Broken in Practice: Assumption Gaps in Cryptographic Model Certification,” evidence record 13728, https://ethics.ai/record/13728 (originally published by arXiv cs.CR (AI security)).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.