cs.SEOct 21, 2026

Agentic Architecture of Information Systems. The AAM/5C Model: A Reference Model for Distributed Autonomy

Authors: Laurent Goujon

Organizations: IBM France

Abstract

Large organizations increasingly face what this book calls the cognitive complexity wall: at the scale of hundreds of interacting components, maintaining the dependency map and reacting at the pace of incidents exceeds what a human team can deliver. This conceptual volume proposes AAM/5C, in which five capabilities (Capture, Comprehend, Choose, Coordinate, Control) are instantiated across seven logical layers, L1 to L7. A single authorization rule, R-AUT, separates who proposes, who decides and who executes: a probabilistic planner (L4) proposes; a governance layer (L6) decides under signed policies and records its verdict in a signed evaluation proof; a security layer (L5) issues a short-lived act token bound to that proof; a policy enforcement point verifies both before the target layer materializes the act. Under an explicit guarantee contract, two analytical statements (H7a, H8a) hold by construction. The other statements of its ten hypotheses (H1 to H10), including log completeness (H7b) and non-bypass of the enforcement point (H8b), are refutable, and the protocol that could refute them is fixed before any measurement. The contribution of the book is a prescriptive reference model that articulates, under this single authorization rule, known mechanisms and adds three constructs, all to be validated: the Validation step of the Distributed Autonomy Loop, the ephemeral authority surface and the cognitive dependency plane. The book positions them against autonomic computing, multi-agent systems, enterprise architecture and agent protocols (MCP, A2A), gives an authorization policy in Rego and a partial TLA+ specification of peer consensus, and sets out a validation program with quantified milestones. It reports no empirical results. This English edition is a translation of the French original, produced with the assistance of AI tools and validated by the author.

Explore similar work

Jul 19, 2026

Specifying the Delegated-Autonomy Boundary: Requirements Engineering for Agentic AI

Agentic AI systems do not just predict or recommend; they plan, maintain state, and act in external environments with varying degrees of autonomy. This changes the requirements engineering problem in a specific and under-addressed way: it introduces what we call the delegated-autonomy boundary -- the set of decisions about what may be delegated to the system, under what graduated authority, with what oversight, and how control is returned. Current practices bury these decisions inside prompts, tool schemas, and runtime policies, even though they are requirements-level commitments. This paper proposes two complementary artifacts. First, an Agency Justification Record (AJR) helps teams decide when an agent is warranted over simpler alternatives. Second, an Agentic Delegation Policy (ADP) captures what must be specified for safe and effective development: purpose, authority, information, coordination, assurance, and evolution. Crucially, authority in the ADP is modelled as graduated, i.e., a tiered structure. We illustrate the framework with two contrasting examples: a safety-critical hospital discharge coordination agent and an automated code review agent.
Jul 26, 2026

Separating Capability from Permission: A Governance Framework for Agentic AI Autonomy Levels

As AI systems increasingly exhibit agentic behavior, discussions of autonomy often conflate what systems are technically capable of doing with what they should be permitted to do in practice. This paper introduces a governance framework that explicitly separates Allowed Autonomy Levels (AAL), which define the degree of autonomy an AI agent is authorized to exercise given risk, oversight, and accountability considerations, from Autonomous Capability Levels (ACL), which characterize an agent's inherent technical abilities. We present a structured set of autonomy levels spanning reactive execution, decision support, supervised action, goal-directed autonomy, and delegated operational authority, and describe how control, reversibility, and accountability change as autonomy increases. To operationalize this framework, we propose a risk-aware decision process for assigning allowed autonomy, analyze how risk and accountability evolve across autonomy levels, and demonstrate its application through a deployed enterprise data engineering agent, illustrating how a system assessed at a high capability level can be deliberately constrained to a lower allowed autonomy based on risk, reversibility, and organizational readiness. By distinguishing authorization from capability, this work provides practical guidance for the design, deployment, and governance of Agentic AI systems.
Jun 24, 2026

Governing Actions, Not Agents: Institutional Attestation as a Governance Model for Autonomous AI Systems

Autonomous AI agents may begin to perform consequential, irreversible actions such as clinical prescribing and production software deployment. This paper observes that human institutions have governed powerful autonomous actors not by monitoring their reasoning but by requiring independently attested evidence at the point of consequential action. We formalise this institutional pattern as a computational governance model for AI agent systems. Under the proposed model, an agent retains full autonomy over planning and reasoning but holds no execution authority over designated high-risk actions. Execution is conditional on preconditions that are each independently attested by a separate authoritative source, cryptographically bound to a declared intent, and evaluated by a deterministic policy. Decisions are recorded in a tamper-evident log amenable to independent re-verification. We present a proof-of-concept implementation and illustrate the model with examples from software deployment and clinical prescribing.