arXiv subjects

Avinash Agarwal

Publications and source records attributed to Avinash Agarwal.

13 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Benchmark-Based Comparative Assessment of Publicly Benchmarked Indian Foundation Models: A Capability and Evaluation-Maturity Framework

Purpose: Governments increasingly fund indigenous foundation models to strengthen national AI capability, digital sovereignty, and multilingual computing. This paper assesses India's foundation-model ecosystem and examines whether apparent capability gaps in public benchmark evidence may also reflect gaps in evaluation maturity. Approach: The paper presents a structured, benchmark-based comparative assessment of Indian foundation models against global frontier and comparable-scale models across eight capability domains: general-purpose reasoning, coding and software engineering, agentic AI and computer use, cybersecurity, vision and image understanding, video and multimodal understanding, scientific research, and Indic language capability. Using only publicly reported results, it proposes an exploratory four-dimension Benchmark Maturity Index (BMI), scoring each domain on standardization, participation, independent verification, and national Findings: Indian models achieve strong scores on established benchmarks such as MMLU and MATH-500. However, these are now widely regarded as saturated, and frontier developers no longer report them. Indian models participate far less frequently in newer, agentic, and domain-specialized evaluations, and participation is highly uneven across organizations. Sarvam AI reports the broadest coverage by a substantial margin. The BMI refines, and in some cases revises, the maturity judgments a purely descriptive review would produce. Practical implications: Many apparent capability gaps cannot be distinguished, on available evidence, from evaluation-ecosystem gaps, with direct implications for how national AI programs should design monitoring and funding criteria. Originality: The paper proposes BMI as a reusable instrument for scoring evaluation-ecosystem maturity at the domain level and demonstrates its application to the Indian foundation-model ecosystem.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

The AI Regulatory Readiness Index ARRI: Assessing Cross-Jurisdictional Legal Preparedness for AI in Telecommunications

As Artificial Intelligence becomes increasingly embedded in critical telecommunications infrastructure, existing legal frameworks remain ill-equipped to address the distinct risks this development introduces. This paper proposes the AI Regulatory Readiness Index (ARRI), a reproducible instrument for doctrinally assessing the legal preparedness of national frameworks to govern AI in critical digital infrastructure, and applies it across ten jurisdictions spanning five continents. ARRI comprises seven indicators across three dimensions: substantive AI-specific obligations, operational safeguards, and governance coordination, scored on a four-point ordinal scale and aggregated to a normalised 0-100 index. Legal instruments in force as of 28 February 2026 are assessed across telecommunications, cybersecurity, data protection, and AI governance domains. The study finds that global AI regulatory readiness in telecommunications remains concentrated in the lower range, with a mean ARRI score of 34 and a median of 26.5. AI incident reporting and risk classification emerge as the most acute and near-universal gaps, with binding legal definitions of AI-specific incidents largely absent across the legal frameworks applicable to telecommunications in the jurisdictions studied. ARRI scores diverge systematically from existing composite indices. For example, Indonesia achieves ITU Global Cybersecurity Index Tier 1 status yet scores 19 under ARRI, demonstrating that cybersecurity readiness and AI regulatory readiness are legally distinct conditions that existing frameworks conflate. The ten jurisdictions are classified into five regulatory archetypes, and a normative minimum standards framework is proposed, anchoring baseline AI governance readiness at an ARRI score of 67. ARRI is designed to be sector-portable and applicable beyond telecommunications to energy, healthcare, and transport infrastructure.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

A federated architecture for sector-led AI governance: lessons from India

Purpose: India has adopted a vertical, sector-led AI governance strategy. While promoting innovation, such a light-touch approach risks policy fragmentation. This paper aims to propose a cohesive "whole-of-government" architecture to mitigate these risks and connect policy goals with a practical implementation plan. Design/methodology/approach: The paper applies an established five-layer conceptual framework to the Indian context. First, it constructs a national architecture for overall governance. Second, it uses a detailed case study on AI incident management to validate and demonstrate the architecture's practical utility in designing a specific, operational system. Findings: The paper develops two actionable architectures. The primary model assigns clear governance roles to India's key institutions. The second is a detailed, federated architecture for national AI Incident Management. It addresses the data silo problem by using a common national standard that allows sector-specific data collection while facilitating cross-sectoral analysis. Practical implications: The proposed architectures offer a clear and predictable roadmap for India's policymakers, regulators and industry to accelerate the national AI governance agenda. Social implications: By providing a systematic path from policy to practice, the architecture builds public trust. This structured approach ensures accountability and aligns AI development with societal values. Originality/value: This paper proposes a detailed operational architecture for India's "whole-of-government" approach to AI. It offers a globally relevant template for any nation pursuing a sector-led governance model, providing a clear implementation plan. Furthermore, the proposed federated architecture demonstrates how adopting common standards can enable cross-border data aggregation and global sectoral risk analysis without centralising control.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Incorporating AI incident reporting into telecommunications law and policy: Insights from India

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into telecommunications infrastructure introduces novel risks, such as algorithmic bias and unpredictable system behavior, that fall outside the scope of traditional cybersecurity and data protection frameworks. This paper introduces a precise definition and a detailed typology of telecommunications AI incidents, establishing them as a distinct category of risk that extends beyond conventional cybersecurity and data protection breaches. It argues for their recognition as a distinct regulatory concern. Using India as a case study for jurisdictions that lack a horizontal AI law, the paper analyzes the country's key digital regulations. The analysis reveals that India's existing legal instruments, including the Telecommunications Act, 2023, the CERT-In Rules, and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, focus on cybersecurity and data breaches, creating a significant regulatory gap for AI-specific operational incidents, such as performance degradation and algorithmic bias. The paper also examines structural barriers to disclosure and the limitations of existing AI incident repositories. Based on these findings, the paper proposes targeted policy recommendations centered on integrating AI incident reporting into India's existing telecom governance. Key proposals include mandating reporting for high-risk AI failures, designating an existing government body as a nodal agency to manage incident data, and developing standardized reporting frameworks. These recommendations aim to enhance regulatory clarity and strengthen long-term resilience, offering a pragmatic and replicable blueprint for other nations seeking to govern AI risks within their existing sectoral frameworks.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Nishpaksh: TEC Standard-Compliant Framework for Fairness Auditing and Certification of AI Models

The growing reliance on Artificial Intelligence (AI) models in high-stakes decision-making systems, particularly within emerging telecom and 6G applications, underscores the urgent need for transparent and standardized fairness assessment frameworks. While global toolkits such as IBM AI Fairness 360 and Microsoft Fairlearn have advanced bias detection, they often lack alignment with region-specific regulatory requirements and national priorities. To address this gap, we propose Nishpaksh, an indigenous fairness evaluation tool that operationalizes the Telecommunication Engineering Centre (TEC) Standard for the Evaluation and Rating of Artificial Intelligence Systems. Nishpaksh integrates survey-based risk quantification, contextual threshold determination, and quantitative fairness evaluation into a unified, web-based dashboard. The tool employs vectorized computation, reactive state management, and certification-ready reporting to enable reproducible, audit-grade assessments, thereby addressing a critical post-standardization implementation need. Experimental validation on the COMPAS dataset demonstrates Nishpaksh's effectiveness in identifying attribute-specific bias and generating standardized fairness scores compliant with the TEC framework. The system bridges the gap between research-oriented fairness methodologies and regulatory AI governance in India, marking a significant step toward responsible and auditable AI deployment within critical infrastructure like telecommunications.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

A five-layer framework for AI governance: integrating regulation, standards, and certification

Purpose: The governance of artificial iintelligence (AI) systems requires a structured approach that connects high-level regulatory principles with practical implementation. Existing frameworks lack clarity on how regulations translate into conformity mechanisms, leading to gaps in compliance and enforcement. This paper addresses this critical gap in AI governance. Methodology/Approach: A five-layer AI governance framework is proposed, spanning from broad regulatory mandates to specific standards, assessment methodologies, and certification processes. By narrowing its scope through progressively focused layers, the framework provides a structured pathway to meet technical, regulatory, and ethical requirements. Its applicability is validated through two case studies on AI fairness and AI incident reporting. Findings: The case studies demonstrate the framework's ability to identify gaps in legal mandates, standardization, and implementation. It adapts to both global and region-specific AI governance needs, mapping regulatory mandates with practical applications to improve compliance and risk management. Practical Implications - By offering a clear and actionable roadmap, this work contributes to global AI governance by equipping policymakers, regulators, and industry stakeholders with a model to enhance compliance and risk management. Social Implications: The framework supports the development of policies that build public trust and promote the ethical use of AI for the benefit of society. Originality/Value: This study proposes a five-layer AI governance framework that bridges high-level regulatory mandates and implementation guidelines. Validated through case studies on AI fairness and incident reporting, it identifies gaps such as missing standardized assessment procedures and reporting mechanisms, providing a structured foundation for targeted governance measures.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Enhancements for Developing a Comprehensive AI Fairness Assessment Standard

As AI systems increasingly influence critical sectors like telecommunications, finance, healthcare, and public services, ensuring fairness in decision-making is essential to prevent biased or unjust outcomes that disproportionately affect vulnerable entities or result in adverse impacts. This need is particularly pressing as the industry approaches the 6G era, where AI will drive complex functions like autonomous network management and hyper-personalized services. The TEC Standard for Fairness Assessment and Rating of AI Systems provides guidelines for evaluating fairness in AI, focusing primarily on tabular data and supervised learning models. However, as AI applications diversify, this standard requires enhancement to strengthen its impact and broaden its applicability. This paper proposes an expansion of the TEC Standard to include fairness assessments for images, unstructured text, and generative AI, including large language models, ensuring a more comprehensive approach that keeps pace with evolving AI technologies. By incorporating these dimensions, the enhanced framework will promote responsible and trustworthy AI deployment across various sectors.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Standardised schema and taxonomy for AI incident databases in critical digital infrastructure

The rapid deployment of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in critical digital infrastructure introduces significant risks, necessitating a robust framework for systematically collecting AI incident data to prevent future incidents. Existing databases lack the granularity as well as the standardized structure required for consistent data collection and analysis, impeding effective incident management. This work proposes a standardized schema and taxonomy for AI incident databases, addressing these challenges by enabling detailed and structured documentation of AI incidents across sectors. Key contributions include developing a unified schema, introducing new fields such as incident severity, causes, and harms caused, and proposing a taxonomy for classifying AI incidents in critical digital infrastructure. The proposed solution facilitates more effective incident data collection and analysis, thus supporting evidence-based policymaking, enhancing industry safety measures, and promoting transparency. This work lays the foundation for a coordinated global response to AI incidents, ensuring trust, safety, and accountability in using AI across regions.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Advancing Trustworthy AI for Sustainable Development: Recommendations for Standardising AI Incident Reporting

The increasing use of AI technologies has led to increasing AI incidents, posing risks and causing harm to individuals, organizations, and society. This study recognizes and addresses the lack of standardized protocols for reliably and comprehensively gathering such incident data crucial for preventing future incidents and developing mitigating strategies. Specifically, this study analyses existing open-access AI-incident databases through a systematic methodology and identifies nine gaps in current AI incident reporting practices. Further, it proposes nine actionable recommendations to enhance standardization efforts to address these gaps. Ensuring the trustworthiness of enabling technologies such as AI is necessary for sustainable digital transformation. Our research promotes the development of standards to prevent future AI incidents and promote trustworthy AI, thus facilitating achieving the UN sustainable development goals. Through international cooperation, stakeholders can unlock the transformative potential of AI, enabling a sustainable and inclusive future for all.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2024

Accessibility evaluation of major assistive mobile applications available for the visually impaired

People with visual impairments face numerous challenges in their daily lives, including mobility, access to information, independent living, and employment. Artificial Intelligence (AI) with Computer Vision (CV) has the potential to improve their daily lives, provide them with necessary independence, and it will also spawn new opportunities in education and employment. However, while many such AI/CV-based mobile applications are now available, these apps are still not the preferred choice amongst visually impaired persons and are generally limited to advanced users only, due to certain limitations. This study evaluates the challenges faced by visually impaired persons when using AI/CV-based mobile apps. Four popular AI/CV- based apps, namely Seeing AI, Supersense, Envision and Lookout, are assessed by blind and low-vision users. Hence these mobile applications are evaluated on a set of parameters, including generic parameters based on the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) and specific parameters related to mobile app testing. The evaluation not only focused on the guidelines but also on the feedback that was gathered from these users on parameters covering the apps' accuracy, response time, reliability, accessibility, privacy, energy efficiency and usability. The paper also identifies the areas of improvement in the development and innovation of these assistive apps. This work will help developers create better accessible AI-based apps for the visually impaired.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2023

Coexistence assessment and interference mitigation for 5G and Fixed Satellite Stations in C-band in India

In this paper, we present the findings of a study conducted to assess the coexistence of Fifth Generation (5G) wireless networks and Fixed Satellite Station (FSS) receivers in the C-Band (3300-4200 MHz) in India. Through simulations, we evaluate the coexistence feasibility and calculate the minimum separation distances required to mitigate interference, consider-ing factors such as 5G Base Station power, off-axis angle, clutter, filtering, and shielding. Next, we present various interference mitigation techniques, including distance, antenna tilt and height, power control, antenna design, coordination, filtering, and others, aiming for balanced coexistence. The simulation results corroborate the efficacy of these solutions in containing interference from 5G in the C-Band FSS receivers. The paper offers valuable insights into frequency allocation in India and considerations for 5G network design, including site selection and antenna orientation. The insights provided are relevant to other regions facing similar coexistence challenges. Overall, this paper offers a comprehensive overview of 5G and FSS coexistence in the C-band, emphasising the importance of addressing this issue during network design and deployment.

cs.NI↗

arXiv2022

A Seven-Layer Model for Standardising AI Fairness Assessment

Problem statement: Standardisation of AI fairness rules and benchmarks is challenging because AI fairness and other ethical requirements depend on multiple factors such as context, use case, type of the AI system, and so on. In this paper, we elaborate that the AI system is prone to biases at every stage of its lifecycle, from inception to its usage, and that all stages require due attention for mitigating AI bias. We need a standardised approach to handle AI fairness at every stage. Gap analysis: While AI fairness is a hot research topic, a holistic strategy for AI fairness is generally missing. Most researchers focus only on a few facets of AI model-building. Peer review shows excessive focus on biases in the datasets, fairness metrics, and algorithmic bias. In the process, other aspects affecting AI fairness get ignored. The solution proposed: We propose a comprehensive approach in the form of a novel seven-layer model, inspired by the Open System Interconnection (OSI) model, to standardise AI fairness handling. Despite the differences in the various aspects, most AI systems have similar model-building stages. The proposed model splits the AI system lifecycle into seven abstraction layers, each corresponding to a well-defined AI model-building or usage stage. We also provide checklists for each layer and deliberate on potential sources of bias in each layer and their mitigation methodologies. This work will facilitate layer-wise standardisation of AI fairness rules and benchmarking parameters.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2022

Fairness Score and Process Standardization: Framework for Fairness Certification in Artificial Intelligence Systems

Decisions made by various Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems greatly influence our day-to-day lives. With the increasing use of AI systems, it becomes crucial to know that they are fair, identify the underlying biases in their decision-making, and create a standardized framework to ascertain their fairness. In this paper, we propose a novel Fairness Score to measure the fairness of a data-driven AI system and a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for issuing Fairness Certification for such systems. Fairness Score and audit process standardization will ensure quality, reduce ambiguity, enable comparison and improve the trustworthiness of the AI systems. It will also provide a framework to operationalise the concept of fairness and facilitate the commercial deployment of such systems. Furthermore, a Fairness Certificate issued by a designated third-party auditing agency following the standardized process would boost the conviction of the organizations in the AI systems that they intend to deploy. The Bias Index proposed in this paper also reveals comparative bias amongst the various protected attributes within the dataset. To substantiate the proposed framework, we iteratively train a model on biased and unbiased data using multiple datasets and check that the Fairness Score and the proposed process correctly identify the biases and judge the fairness.

cs.CY↗