Ensuring Safe Physical AI in Urban Mobility via Hazard-Informed Synthesized Envelopes

As heterogeneous robotic systems deploy across diverse urban zones, maintaining safety amid complex human-robot interactions remains a critical challenge. We present a unified framework that bridges systematic hazard analysis and runtime enforcement using hazard-informed safety envelopes. Rather than treating safety as a static constraint isolated within individual software modules, we introduce a cross-layer safety transformation process spanning symbolic, spatial, and dynamic world models. We show how this representation naturally interfaces with physical AI runtime harnesses to guarantee safe urban mobility.

Traceable LLM-Generated Hazard Scenarios for Operational Safety Analysis of Aviation Systems Using ASRS Reports

Operational hazard analysis of aviation system operations must consider interactions among weather, ATC actions, airspace constraints, aircraft operations, and human factors - distinct from the functional hazard assessment applied at the aircraft-system level. We present an AI-assisted approach that generates candidate hazard scenarios from NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS). Given a target adverse outcome, it produces a structured hypothesis as categorical factors and a narrative scenario describing an operational event sequence consistent with the structure. Each scenario includes by a plausibility score from historical co-occurrence evidence and traceability to the most similar held-out ASRS reports. We then propose a hybrid variant, conditioning narrative generation on a structured hypothesis produced via evolutionary abduction, improving correctness and reducing variability. We evaluate multiple large language models, zero-shot versus few-shot prompting, and optional fine-tuning, measuring how prompting and model choice affect the validity and realism of the generated structures and narratives.

Who Analyses the Analyser? Self-Validating LLM Hazard Analysis with Constitutional Meta-STPA

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly trusted to draft the artifacts of safety analysis such as, losses, hazards, Unsafe Control Actions (UCAs), and safety constraints, inside rigorous processes such as Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA). Yet a blind spot runs through this fast-growing literature: every system gets analysed except the LLM-assisted tool doing the analysing, which is itself a safety-relevant system that can hallucinate standards, emit unverifiable constraints, and leave no audit trail from prompt to artifact. We take seriously the question the field has skipped -- {who analyses the analyser?} and answer it by turning STPA on the tool itself. We present \{Constitutional Meta-STPA}, an LLM-assisted STPA tool built around a closed loop: the tool runs a {meta-STPA} of the class of AI-assisted safety tools and {derives} rather than asserts, its governance constitution from the resulting loss$\to$hazard$\to$UCA$\to$constraint chain, yielding a published constitution of $21$ Tool Principles and $8$ Meta-Safety Principles, each bound to a code enforcement point. We formalise the measured object as a constitution-marginal coverage operator over a principle set $P$ ($|P|{=}29$) with a soundness lemma that isolates coverage from model and scanner, and report four findings. {(i)~Self-derivation:} a frontier ensemble ({claude-opus-4.8}${+}${claude-sonnet-4}) recovers $18/21$ canonical and all $8/8$ governance principles from the tool's own design, while a weaker pair recovers $12/21$ and $3/8$, so the meta layer is model-limited, not constitution-limited, and the same $8/8$ re-emerge from a second, independently authored tool.