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

Abstract: 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.
Submission history
Access Paper:

Current browse context:
References & Citations
BibTeX formatted citation


arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .
Verified source · arXiv.org
Reported by arXiv.org. Open the original for full media and formatting.
More in Policy
All newsWhen Synthetic Speech Is All You Have: Better Call GRPO
arXiv:2607.08409v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based ASR adapted to regulated domains such as banking is bottlenecked by privacy: real speech is costly and legally constrained to collect, making synthetic text-to-speech (TTS) an attractive substitute. Yet synthetic speech…
Read at arXiv cs.AIMultimodal Unlearning Across Vision, Language, Video, and Audio: Survey of Methods, Datasets, and Benchmarks
arXiv:2607.07907v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: With the growing adoption of VLMs, DMs, LLMs, and AFMs, these multimodal foundation models can inadvertently encode sensitive, copyrighted, biased, or unsafe cross-modal associations that originate from their training data. Retra…
Read at arXiv cs.AIEfficient Safety Alignment of Language Models via Latent Personality Traits
arXiv:2607.07918v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Current safety methods for large language models are known to be vulnerable to adversarial attacks, motivating research into robust alternatives. Latent Adversarial Training (LAT) is among the most effective defenses, but can deg…
Read at arXiv cs.AIUltraX: Refining Pre-Training Data at Scale with Adaptive Programmatic Editing
arXiv:2607.08646v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As available training data approaches its physical limit, gains from Scaling Laws have begun to diminish. Consequently, improving Large Language Models (LLMs) now depends less on data expansion and more on higher-quality data uti…
Read at arXiv cs.AI