Sheaf-Theoretic Transport and Obstruction for Detecting Scientific Theory Shift in AI Agents

AI agents increasingly act within the same clinical, political, scientific, and social systems that behavioral scientists study. Evaluating these systems requires source-level diagnosis: the same behavioral pattern may arise from an agent representational substrate or from the roles, objectives, interaction structures, and governance rules that shape its expression. This Perspective proposes a diagnostic framework for AI agent behavior: layer attribution. The foundational computational layer defines what behaviors are possible through architecture, memory, perception, attention, and representation. The behavioral modulation layer shapes how those capacities are expressed through identity, resources, objectives, social interaction, institutional constraints, and governance. The framework clarifies three consequences: surrogate validity is a model-task-layer relation, human-AI divergence provides diagnostic evidence, and governance requires source attribution before intervention. Treating AI agents as behavioral actors therefore requires evaluation methods that determine where behavior originates before deciding how to explain, validate, or govern it.

What happens to an LLM agent's tool choice when the reliable tool silently changes within an ongoing session? We borrow set-shifting from cognitive psychology to study how well agents adapt to hidden reliability shifts. Our benchmark mounts tool-skill libraries with redundancies, where many tools solve the same task but differ in hidden reliability. In our evaluation framework, a branched schedule shifts the reliable tool group at hidden boundaries and pairs every shift with a no-shift control. We find that agents, by default, settle on a small recurring routine within a few turns of each boundary, with call shares concentrating on a few discrete values after each reliability shift. We score the set-shifting accuracy for each agent trajectory: the joint probability of routing to the target tool group in every post-shift window. We test open-weight LLMs in an open-source agentic harness and find qualitatively distinct failure modes across the same set of routines. We also find that set framing, how the toolset presents the alternatives as competing or complementary, shifts the routing dynamics.

AI agents in long-context applications drift from their specified identity. Current methods detect this only after qualitative degradation is visible. We present a geometric framework for measuring identity structure using $\sqrt{\mathrm{JSD}}$ metric spaces and magnitude homology from enriched category theory, where identity is non-geodesic structure and drift is its relaxation toward the geodesic. Validated on a persistent AI agent, the framework's strongest empirical finding is a two-mechanism conditioning structure: cross-condition distances reveal an identity-vacuum cluster where the identity specification fills a behavioral void, and a safety-basin cluster where it displaces from post-training attractors. An equilateral probe baseline confirms that the identity specification creates measurable behavioral richness (55 unique response patterns vs. 1 for the base model) at maximum probe separation. A first-order perturbation theory for equilateral configurations predicts magnitude changes from perimeter changes alone, with shape perturbations first-order cancelled by the $S_n$ symmetry; the formula is self-consistent at the observed perturbation amplitudes. A drift experiment measuring magnitude decrease under context pressure was subsequently found to reflect repetitive-padding artifacts rather than genuine context-length drift; diverse padding produces no measurable deformation through 150K tokens. The magnitude homology framework's full diagnostic promise -- detecting anisotropic contraction and structural collapse via homological simplification -- is architecturally grounded in the perturbation theory and selection rules but remains empirically unconfirmed.