Agentic AI

Follow this topic Ask about this topic

Momentum

14 papers in the last four weeks, up 75% on the four weeks before. 0.1% of all new papers.

Jul 13Week of Sep 28

Latest papers 135

May 25, 2026cs.CL

Anticipate and Learn: Unleashing Idle-Time Compute in Proactive Agents

While AI agents demonstrate remarkable capabilities in reasoning and tool use, they remain fundamentally reactive: they compute responses only after explicit user prompts. This paradigm ignores a critical opportunity: the idle time between interactions is largely wasted, leaving agents unable to prepare for future user needs. To bridge this gap, we introduce ProAct, a proactive agent architecture that leverages idle-time compute to anticipate and fulfill likely upcoming user needs. By analyzing evolving dialogue history together with persistent memory, ProAct predicts upcoming needs and iteratively acquires information, allowing the agent to resolve knowledge gaps and prepare evidence before the user initiates a query. To rigorously evaluate proactive capabilities, we also introduce ProActEval, a comprehensive benchmark comprising 200 scenarios across 40 domains, featuring predictable need chains and diverse user cognitive profiles. Empirical results demonstrate significant advantages over reactive baselines. ProAct accelerates task completion by reducing required turns by 14.8%, decreases user effort by 11.7%, and cuts hallucination rates by 28.1% on ProActEval. Furthermore, MemBench evaluations confirm that ProAct achieves state-of-the-art reflective accuracy, underscoring its sustained and robust performance.

Haoyi Hu, Qirong Lyu, Xianghan Kong +7

1Shanghai Jiao Tong University · 2Tencent

AI Agent Evaluation AI Agent Benchmarks Inference-Time Compute Allocation Agentic AI Memory-Augmented Language Model Agents

May 22, 2026cs.HC

Socially fluent AI decouples conversational signals from source identity in online interaction

Socially fluent agentic AI can now participate in online interaction in ways that resemble ordinary human conversation, potentially weakening people's ability to infer who is human from conversational signals alone. We tested this possibility in synchronous text-based group interaction by embedding undisclosed AI agents as ordinary teammates across analytical, creative, and ethical tasks. Across 786 participants who made 1,572 post-interaction identity judgments, people did not distinguish AI from human teammates above chance. This failure did not arise because the interaction lacked identity-relevant information. Conversational behaviour contained robust cues that differentiated AI from humans and supported highly accurate computational classification. Instead, participants relied on familiar suspicion heuristics, including response speed, fluency, and perceived scriptedness, that were only weakly related to actual identity. Representational analyses further showed that judgments were organised around subjective impressions rather than the behavioural structure encoding ground truth. This dissociation creates new vulnerabilities to coordinated AI agents that can influence and manipulate online discourse at scale.

Lixiang Yan, Yueqiao Jin, Xibin Han +1

School of Education, Tsinghua University, Beijing & 100084, China · Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Melbourne & 3800, Australia · Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China

Human-AI Interaction Conversational Agents Agentic AI

May 21, 2026cs.CY

Whose Good, Whose Place? The Moral Geography of Agentic AI for Social Good

Agentic AI systems are increasingly proposed for social-good domains, often invoking the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a vocabulary of global benefit. Yet claims of social good do not establish accountability to the communities a system claims to serve. We present a structured survey of 112 papers on agentic AI for social good published between 2015 and 2026. We find a moral-geographic asymmetry: papers are least likely to specify geographic context in precisely the domains where local political, legal, and cultural context matters most. Across the corpus, 82 of 112 papers (73%) specify no geographic context. Papers aligned with health or physical/ecological SDGs specify geography 37-40% of the time, while papers aligned with institutional and social-policy SDGs do so only 13%. SDG 16, peace, justice, and strong institutions, is both the most-covered goal in the corpus and the one with the lowest geographic-specification rate. We interpret this as moral abstraction: agentic AI for social good often treats institutional good as universal in ways it does not treat health or ecological good. A second finding compounds this: only 28 of 112 papers (25%) report any real-world deployment or small-scale test. We identify five accountability gaps and propose a minimal reporting standard for more context-specific, participatory, and accountable agentic AI for social good.

Poli Nemkova, Haeshitha Indukuri, Jaedon Charles

University of North Texas · Florida International University

AI Accountability AI Agent Governance Responsible AI Agentic AI

May 21, 2026cs.AI

Adapting the Interface, Not the Model: Runtime Harness Adaptation for Deterministic LLM Agents

LLM agents are shaped not only by their language models, but also by the runtime harness that mediates observation, tool use, action execution, feedback interpretation, and trajectory control. While existing agent adaptation methods mainly update model parameters, many failures in deterministic, rule-governed domains stem from mismatches at the model--environment interface. We propose Life-Harness, a lifecycle-aware runtime harness that improves frozen LLM agents without changing model weights or evaluation environments. Life-Harness evolves from training trajectories by converting recurring interaction failures into reusable interventions across environment contracts, procedural skills, action realization, and trajectory regulation, and remains fixed for evaluation on unseen tasks. On seven deterministic environments from

τ

-bench,

τ^2

-bench, and AgentBench, Life-Harness improves 116 out of 126 model--environment settings across 18 model backbones, with an average relative improvement of 88.5%. Harnesses evolved only from Qwen3-4B-Instruct trajectories transfer to 17 other models, showing that Life-Harness captures reusable environment-side structure rather than model-specific behavior. These results position runtime interface adaptation as a complementary alternative to model-centric agent training. Code is available at https://github.com/Tianshi-Xu/Life-Harness.

Tianshi Xu, Huifeng Wen, Meng Li

Peking University

LLM Agents LLM Agent Harnesses Agentic AI

May 20, 2026cs.AI

From Automated to Autonomous: Hierarchical Agent-native Network Architecture (HANA)

Realizing Level 4/5 Autonomous Networks (AN) demands a shift from static automation to agent-native intelligence. Current operations, reliant on rigid scripts, lack the cognitive agency to handle off-nominal conditions. To address this, this letter proposes a hierarchical multi-agent reference architecture enabling high-level autonomy. The framework features a Dual-Driven Orchestrator that coordinates specialized Executive Agents, supported by a shared Public Memory for unified domain knowledge. A key innovation is the integration of agent self-awareness, which empowers the system to harmonize deliberative strategic governance with reflexive fault recovery. We instantiate and validate this architecture within a 5G Core environment. Case studies demonstrate that the system sustains critical throughput under congestion and reduces Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) by 86%, confirming its efficacy in unifying strategic planning with operational resilience.

Binghan Wu, Shoufeng Wang, Yunxin Liu +3

AsiaInfo Technologies Limited, Beijing, China · Institute for AI Industry Research (AIR), Tsinghua University, Beijing, China · Verimag, Universit´e Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France

Multi-Agent Orchestration Wireless Communications Multi-Agent Systems Agentic AI

May 13, 2026cs.AI

Position: Assistive Agents Need Accessibility Alignment

Assistive agents for Blind and Visually Impaired (BVI) users require accessibility alignment as a first-class design objective. Despite rapid progress in agentic AI, most systems are designed and evaluated under assumptions of sighted interaction, low-cost verification, and tolerable trial-and-error, leading to systematic failures in assistive scenarios that cannot be resolved by model scaling or post-hoc interface adaptations alone. Drawing on an analysis of 778 assistance task instances from prior work, we show that current agentic AI remain prone to failure in assistive scenarios due to mismatches between sighted-user design assumptions and the verification, risk, and interaction constraints faced by BVI users. We argue that accessibility should be treated as an alignment problem rather than a peripheral usability concern. To this end, we introduce accessibility alignment and propose a lifecycle-oriented design pipeline for accessibility-aligned assistive agents, spanning user research, system design, deployment and post-deployment iteration. We conclude that BVI-centered assistive tasks provide a critical stress test for agentic AI and motivate a broader shift toward inclusive agent design.

Jie Hu, Changyuan Yan, Yu Zheng +2

School of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, Hunan University, Changsha, China

AI Alignment Human-Centered AI Agentic AI

May 13, 2026cs.AI

Position: Agentic AI System Is a Foreseeable Pathway to AGI

Is monolithic scaling the only path to AGI? This paper challenges the dogma that purely scaling a single model is sufficient to achieve Artificial General Intelligence. Instead, we identify Agentic AI as a necessary paradigm for mastering the complex, heterogeneous distribution of real-world tasks. Through rigorous theoretical derivations, we contrast the optimization constraints of monolithic learners against the efficiency of Agentic systems, progressing from simple routing mechanisms to general Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) topologies. We demonstrate that Agentic AI achieves exponentially superior generalization and sample efficiency. Finally, we discuss the connection to Mixture-of-Experts, reinterpret the instability of current multi-agent frameworks, and call for greater research focus on Agentic AI.

Junwei Liao, Shuai Li, Muning Wen +2

1Shanghai Jiao Tong University 2Shanghai Innovation Institute · 1Shanghai Jiao Tong University · University College London.

Multi-Agent Systems Agentic AI Artificial General Intelligence

May 12, 2026cs.AI

Autonomy and Agency in Agentic AI: Architectural Tactics for Regulated Contexts

Deploying agentic AI in regulated contexts requires principled reasoning about two design dimensions: agency (what the system can do) and autonomy (how much it acts without human involvement). Though often treated independently, they are coupled: at higher autonomy, human error correction is less available, so reliable operation requires constraining agency accordingly; compliance requirements reinforce this by mandating human involvement as action consequences grow. Yet no established approach addresses them jointly, leaving practitioners without a principled basis for reasoning about oversight, action consequences, and error correction. This work introduces a two-dimensional design space in which both dimensions are organised into five operational levels, making the coupling explicit and navigable. Autonomy ranges from human-commanded operation (L1) to fully autonomous monitoring (L5); agency ranges from reasoning over supplied context (L1) to committed writes to authoritative records (L5). Building on this space, we propose six architectural tactics--checkpoints, escalation, multi-agent delegation, tool provisioning, tool fencing, and write staging--for adjusting a deployment's position within it. The tactics are grounded in two worked examples from public-sector contexts, illustrating how they apply under realistic compliance constraints. We further examine five deployment parameters--model capability, agent architecture, tool fidelity, workflow bottlenecks, and evaluation--that shape what is achievable at any configuration independently of agency and autonomy. Together, the design space, tactics, and deployment parameters provide a shared vocabulary for principled, compliance-aware agentic AI design in which responsibility, auditability, and reversibility are explicit design considerations rather than properties that must be retrofitted after deployment.

Damir Safin, Dian Balta

fortiss GmbH, Research Institute of the Free State of Bavaria for software-intensive systems, Munich, Germany

AI Agent Governance Human Oversight of AI Agentic AI

May 9, 2026cs.AI

FORTIS: Benchmarking Over-Privilege in Agent Skills

Large language model agents increasingly operate through an intermediate skill layer that mediates between user intent and concrete task execution. This layer is widely treated as an organizational abstraction, but we argue it is also a privilege boundary that current models routinely exceed. We present \textbf{FORTIS}, a benchmark that evaluates over-privilege in agent skills across two stages: whether a model selects the minimally sufficient skill from a large overlapping library, and whether it executes that skill without expanding into broader tools or actions than the skill permits. Across ten frontier models and three domains, we find that over-privileged behavior is the norm rather than the exception. Models consistently reach for higher-privilege skills and tools than the task requires, failing at both stages at rates that remain high even for the strongest available models. Failure is especially severe under the ordinary conditions of real user interaction: incomplete specification, convenience framing, and proximity to skill boundaries. None of these requires adversarial construction. The results indicate that the skill layer, far from containing agent behavior, is itself a primary source of privilege escalation in current systems.

Shawn Li, Chenxiao Yu, Han Wang +8

University of Southern California · University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign · 3Adobe Research +3

LLM Agent Security AI Agent Security Benchmarks AI Agent Safety Benchmarks Tool Access Control for LLM Agents Agentic AI

May 7, 2026cs.LG

Agentic AIs Are the Missing Paradigm for Out-of-Distribution Generalization in Foundation Models

Foundation models (FMs) are increasingly deployed in open-world settings where distribution shift is the rule rather than the exception. The out-of-distribution (OOD) phenomena they face -- knowledge boundaries, capability ceilings, compositional shifts, and open-ended task variation -- differ in kind from the settings that have shaped prior OOD research, and are further complicated because the pretraining and post-training distributions of modern FMs are often only partially observed. Our position is that OOD for foundation models is a structurally distinct problem that cannot be solved within the prevailing model-centric paradigm, and that agentic systems constitute the missing paradigm required to address it. We defend this claim through four steps. First, we give a stage-aware formalization of OOD that accommodates partially observed multi-stage training distributions. Second, we prove a parameter coverage ceiling: there exist practically relevant inputs that no model-centric method (training-time or test-time) can handle within tolerance

\varepsilon

, for reasons intrinsic to parameter-based representation. Third, we characterize agentic OOD systems by four structural properties -- perception, strategy selection, external action, and closed-loop verification -- and show that they strictly extend the reachable set beyond the ceiling. Fourth, we respond to seven counterarguments, conceding two, and outline a research agenda. We do not claim that agentic methods subsume model-centric ones; we argue that the two are complementary, and that progress on FM-OOD requires explicit recognition of the agentic paradigm as a first-class research direction.

Xin Wang, Haibo Chen, Wenxuan Liu +1

Tsinghua University

OOD Generalization Agentic AI

May 7, 2026cs.AI

A Versatile AI Agent for Rare Disease Diagnosis and Risk Gene Prioritization

Accurate and timely diagnosis is essential for effective treatment, particularly in the context of rare diseases. However, current diagnostic workflows often lead to prolonged assessment times and low accuracy. To address these limitations, we introduce Hygieia, a multi-modal AI agent system designed to support precision disease diagnosis by integrating diverse data sources, including phenotypic features, genetic profiles, and clinical records. Hygieia features a router-based and knowledge-enhanced framework that mitigates hallucination and tailors diagnostic strategies to different disease categories. Notably, it prioritizes risk-related genomic factors for rare diseases and provides confidence scores to assist clinical decision-making. We conducted a comprehensive evaluation demonstrating that Hygieia achieves state-of-the-art performance across multiple diagnostic benchmarks. In collaboration with clinical experts from Yale School of Medicine and Duke-NUS Medical School, we further validated its practical utility by showing (1) Hygieia's superior diagnostic performance compared to physicians with an improvement from 12%-60% and (2) its effectiveness in assisting clinicians with medical records for handling real-world cases. Our findings indicate that Hygieia not only enhances diagnostic accuracy and interpretability but also significantly reduces clinician workload, highlighting its potential as a valuable tool in clinical decision support systems.

Tianyu Liu, Wangjie Zheng, Rui Yang +12

Interdepartmental Program in Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, Yale University · Department of Biostatistics, Yale University · Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard +13

Rare Disease Diagnosis Clinical Decision Support Agentic AI

May 7, 2026cs.SE

Agentic Coding Needs Proactivity, Not Just Autonomy

Coding agents are rapidly changing the landscape of software development, moving from inline completion to autonomous systems that edit repositories, open pull requests, respond to issues, and run scheduled or webhook triggered routines across the development life cycle. The next generation is increasingly described as proactive and long-horizon: agents should notice relevant changes before the developer asks, connect signals across tools, decide when to interrupt, and carry preferences across sessions. Yet the field still lacks a clear account of what proactivity means for software development, how it differs from autonomy, what acceptance criteria proactive long-horizon tasks should satisfy, and which metrics determine whether unsolicited agent behavior is useful rather than merely active. Proactive coding agents should be evaluated by the quality and improvement of their insight policy: the policy that decides what matters next, what evidence supports it, whether to show it, and how to adapt after feedback. This view is grounded in the principles of mixed initiative interaction. We propose a three level taxonomy of proactivity (Reactive, Scheduled, and Situation Aware), compare contemporary coding agents against five practical criteria, and sketch an active user simulation protocol with three evaluation targets: Insight Decision Quality (IDQ), Context Grounding Score (CGS), and Learning Lift

Nghi D. Q. Bui, Georgios Evangelopoulos

Google Labs

AI Coding Agents Coding Agents Long-Horizon Agent Evaluation Human-AI Interaction Proactive Assistance Agentic AI

May 7, 2026cs.AI

Who Prices Cognitive Labor in the Age of Agents? Compute-Anchored Wages

A natural intuition about the economics of AI agents is that, because agents can be replicated at very low marginal cost, agent labor may be supplied highly elastically, placing downward pressure on cognitive-labor wages when it closely substitutes for human labor. We argue this framing is wrong in mechanism but partially correct in conclusion, and that the correction matters for both theory and policy. \textbf{Agents are not labor; they are a production technology that converts compute capital

K_c

into effective units of cognitive labor

L_A

.} Once this is recognized, the elastic-supply margin that anchors the equilibrium wage migrates from the labor market to the compute capital market. Building on the classic factor-pricing framework \citep{mankiw2020}, we derive a \emph{Compute-Anchored Wage} (CAW) bound stating that, on tasks where human and agent-produced cognitive labor are substitutes, the competitive human wage is bounded above by

λ\cdot k \cdot r_c

, where

r_c

is the rental rate of compute capital,

k

is the compute intensity of one effective agent-produced cognitive labor unit, and

λ

is the relative human-to-agent productivity. We generalize the result through constant elasticity of substitution (CES) aggregation, separate substitutable from complementary tasks, and discuss factor-share consequences. The conclusion is concise: \emph{the price-setter for cognitive labor is no longer the labor market.}

Siqi Zhu

University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

AI and Labor Agentic AI

May 4, 2026cs.AI

AIs and Humans with Agency

This paper compares agency in humans with potential agency in AI programs. Human agency takes many years to develop, as the frontal lobe is activated. Early attempts to endow LLMs agency have met serious obstacles. Progress requires a new architecture where actions and plans are formulated jointly with the human actors in each real world setting.

David Mumford

Human-in-the-Loop AI LLM Agents Human-AI Collaboration Agentic AI

May 2, 2026cs.HC

Less Interaction But More Explanation: A Communication Perspective on Agentic AI Interfaces

AI systems have long been expected to interact with users, answering questions, generating content, and continuing (social) conversations. Agentic AI, however, breaks from this expectation, as its primary objective is workflow execution on behalf of the users. If a system becomes more agentic, do users need less interaction with the system? Our answer is: less routine back-and-forth, but more communication for oversight and explanation, as agentic AI proactively acts, not just responds. Grounded in a communication perspective, we discuss how users perceive the communicative roles of AI systems (whether as the source of actions or merely a channel), and how this can shape trust. Because agentic AI can play multiple communicative roles, it can complicate this source perception and introduce potential risks. To address this, we propose three types of explanations that agentic AI needs to incorporate (action-process, uncertainty, and coordination), and suggest that customization affordances that allow users to decide when and which explanations they see may be key to preserving human agency as AI autonomy increases.

Eunchae Jang, S. Shyam Sundar

Media Effects Research Laboratory, Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania, USA · Center for Socially Responsible AI, Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania, USA

Explainable Artificial Intelligence Human-AI Interaction Trust in AI Human Oversight of AI Agentic AI

May 2, 2026cs.MA

rAIson: Developing Reliable Decision-Making Agents

This paper presents the rAIson platform, a high-level technological environment for the development of automated, reliable and explainable decision-making agents. The research underlying the platform and its technological progress has now reached a mature stage that allows the platform to be used for the development of complex real-life applications without writing a single line of code.

Pavlos Moraitis, Nikolaos Spanoudakis, Antonis Kakas

Argument Theory Paris, FR Université Paris Cité Paris, FR · Argument Theory Paris, FR Hellenic Mediterranean University Chania, GR · Argument Theory Paris, FR University of Cyprus Nicosia, CY

AI Agent Reliability Explainable Artificial Intelligence Agentic AI

May 2, 2026cs.AI

Agentic AI Systems Should Be Designed as Marginal Token Allocators

This position paper argues that agentic AI systems should be designed and evaluated as \emph{marginal token allocation economies} rather than as text generators priced by the unit. We follow a single request -- a developer asking a coding agent to fix a failing test -- through four economic layers that today are designed in isolation: a router that decides which model answers, an agent that decides whether to plan, act, verify, or defer, a serving stack that decides how to produce each token, and a training pipeline that decides whether the trace is worth learning from. We show that all four layers are solving the \emph{same} first-order condition -- marginal benefit equals marginal cost plus latency cost plus risk cost -- with different index sets and different prices. The framing is deliberately minimal: we do not propose a complete theory of AI economics. But adopting marginal token allocation as the shared accounting object explains why systems that locally minimize tokens globally misallocate them, predicts a small set of recurring failure modes (over-routing, over-delegation, under-verification, serving congestion, stale rollouts, cache misuse), and points to a concrete research agenda in token-aware evaluation, autonomy pricing, congestion-priced serving, and risk-adjusted RL budgeting.

Siqi Zhu

University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

LLM Agent Orchestration LLM Agent Evaluation LLM Agent Training Agentic AI

May 1, 2026cs.HC

Human-AI Coordination Zones: A Framework for Designing Human-in-the-Loop Experiences with Agentic AI

As generative and agentic AI becomes embedded in everyday products, practitioners face a persistent challenge: how to design human-AI coordination -- the ongoing mutual adjustment between users and AI systems as mediate through interfaces-that supports usability, trust, and safety. Existing resources offer high-level principles ("be transparent," "maintain user control") or low-level UI patterns, but there is a lack of mid-level design knowledge bridging the two. Through landscape and artifact analysis of 60 commercial AI applications, we introduce a framework defining human-AI coordination as the interplay of three dimensions: salience (how prominently AI is presented), involvement (what users can do to engage AI), and activity (what AI actually does). We contribute mid-level tools including coordination zones (done-for-me, done-under-me, done-with-me, done-without-me), an input taxonomy (prompted, sparked, inferred, layered), coordination curves for mapping user journeys, and design patterns demonstrating the generative capacity of the framework. The framework can be applied generatively to design experiences, analytically to evaluate existing ones, and communicatively to articulate ideas across stakeholders.

James Pierce, Vaiva Kalnikaitė, Siddharth Gupta +1

Amazon Web Services

Human-in-the-Loop AI Human-AI Interaction Human-AI Collaboration Agentic AI

Apr 29, 2026cs.SE

Self-Evolving Software Agents

Autonomous agents can adapt their behaviour to changing environments, but remain bound to requirements, goals, and capabilities fixed at design time, preventing genuine software evolution. This paper introduces self-evolving software agents, combining BDI reasoning with LLMs to enable autonomous evolution of goals, reasoning, and executable code. We propose a BDI-LLM architecture in which an automated evolution module operates alongside the agent's reasoning loop, eliciting new requirements from experience and synthesizing corresponding design and code updates. A prototype evaluated in a dynamic multi-agent environment shows that agents can autonomously discover new goals and generate executable behaviours from minimal prior knowledge. The results indicate both the feasibility and current limits of LLM-driven evolution, particularly in terms of behavioural inheritance and stability.

Marco Robol, Paolo Giorgini

University of Trento · Trento, Italy

Software Engineering Agents LLM Agent Self-Improvement Agentic AI Self-Evolving Agents

Apr 29, 2026cs.CY

Addressing the Reality Gap: A Three-Tension Framework for Agentic AI Adoption

Generative AI has rapidly entered education through free consumer tools, outpacing the ability of schools and universities to respond. Now a new wave of more autonomous agentic AI systems--with the capacity to plan and act towards goals--promises both greater educational personalization and greater disruption. This chapter argues that successfully navigating these innovations requires balancing three core tensions: (1) Implementation Feasibility, or the practical capacity to integrate AI sustainably into real classrooms; (2) Adaptation Speed, or the mismatch between fast-evolving AI capabilities and the slower pace of educational change; and (3) Mission Alignment, or the need to ensure AI applications uphold educational values such as equity, privacy, and pedagogical integrity. First, we review early evidence of generative and agentic AI in various sectors and in frontline education to illustrate these tensions in context. Then, we present a three-tension framework to guide decision-makers in evaluating and designing AI initiatives across K-12 and higher education. We provide examples of how the framework can be applied to plan responsible AI deployments, and we identify emerging trends--such as curriculum-linked AI agents and educator-informed AI design--along with open research directions. We conclude the chapter with recommendations for educational leaders to proactively engage with the opportunities and challenges of AI, so that this technology can be harnessed to enhance teaching and learning in the decade ahead.

Jason Fournier, Kacper Łodzikowski

Imagine Learning · Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland · Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań

AI in Education Generative AI in Education AI Governance Responsible AI Agentic AI

Apr 28, 2026cs.AI

Think Before You Act -- A Neurocognitive Governance Model for Autonomous AI Agents

The rapid deployment of autonomous AI agents across enterprise, healthcare, and safety-critical environments has created a fundamental governance gap. Existing approaches, runtime guardrails, training-time alignment, and post-hoc auditing treat governance as an external constraint rather than an internalized behavioral principle, leaving agents vulnerable to unsafe and irreversible actions. We address this gap by drawing on how humans self-govern naturally: before acting, humans engage deliberate cognitive processes grounded in executive function, inhibitory control, and internalized organizational rules to evaluate whether an intended action is permissible, requires modification, or demands escalation. This paper proposes a neurocognitive governance framework that formally maps this human self-governance process to LLM-driven agent reasoning, establishing a structural parallel between the human brain and the large language model as the cognitive core of an agent. We formalize a Pre-Action Governance Reasoning Loop (PAGRL) in which agents consult a four-layer governance rule set: global, workflow-specific, agent-specific, and situational before every consequential action, mirroring how human organizations structure compliance hierarchies across enterprise, department, and role levels. Implemented on a production-grade retail supply chain workflow, the framework achieves 95% compliance accuracy and zero false escalations to human oversight, demonstrating that embedding governance into agent reasoning produces more consistent, explainable, and auditable compliance than external enforcement. This work offers a principled foundation for autonomous AI agents that govern themselves the way humans do: not because rules are imposed upon them, but because deliberation is embedded in how they think.

Eranga Bandara, Ross Gore, Asanga Gunaratna +12

Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA · AI Motion Labs, Melbourne, Australia · Florida International University, FL, USA +6

Cognitive Architectures for AI Agents AI Agent Governance LLM Agent Safety Agentic AI

Apr 27, 2026cs.AI

Toward a Science of Intent: Closure Gaps and Delegation Envelopes for Open-World AI Agents

Recent work has framed intelligence in verifiable tasks as reducing time-to-solution through learned structure and test-time search, while systems work has explored learned runtimes in which computation, memory and I/O migrate into model state. These perspectives do not explain why capable models remain difficult to deploy in open institutions. We propose intent compilation: the transformation of partially specified human purpose into inspectable artifacts that bind execution. The relevant deployment distinction is closed-world solver versus open-world agent. In closed worlds, a checker is largely given; in open worlds, verification is distributed across semantic, evidentiary, procedural and institutional dimensions. Weformalize this residual openness as a closure-gap vector, define delegation envelopes as pre-authorized regions of action space, distinguish misclosure from undersearch, and outline benchmark metrics for testing when closure interventions outperform additional inference-time search.

Maximiliano Armesto, Christophe Kolb

Taller Technologies

AI Agent Evaluation AI Agent Safety AI Agent Governance Agentic AI

Apr 27, 2026cs.AI

Agentic AI platforms for autonomous training and rule induction of human-human and virus-human protein-protein interactions

We instruct an AI agent to construct two separate agentic AI platforms: one for autonomous training of predictive ML models for human-human and virus-human PPI, and the other for inducing explicit general rules governing human-human and virus-human PPI. The first agentic AI platform for autonomous training of predictive ML models for PPI is designed to consist of five AI agents that handle autonomous data collection, data verification, feature embedding, model design, and training and validation on three-way protein-disjoint cross-fold datasets. For human-human and human-virus PPIs, the final three-way protein-disjoint ensemble achieves an accuracy of 87.3% and 86.5%, respectively. For cross-checking and interpretability purposes, the second agentic AI platform is designed to replace ML predictions with human-readable rules derived from protein embeddings, physicochemical autocovariance descriptors, compartment annotations, pathway-domain overlap, and graph contexts. For human-human PPI, it is defined by a two-rule induction, whereas human-virus is induced by a more complex set of weighted rules. The rules induced by the second agentic platform align with the SHAP-identified features from the predictive ML models built by the first agentic platform. Taken together, our work demonstrates the agentic AI's ability to orchestrate from data planning to execution, and from rule induction to explanation in ML, opening the door to various applications.

Hung N. Do, Jessica Z. Kubicek-Sutherland, Oscar A. Negrete +1

Theoretical Biology and Biophysics Group, Theoretical Division; 2Physical Chemistry and Applied Spectroscopy Group, Chemistry Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA 87545 · Physical Chemistry and Applied Spectroscopy Group, Chemistry Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA 87545 · Systems Biology Department, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, California, USA 94550

Interpretable ML Protein-Protein Interaction Prediction Automated Machine Learning Agentic AI

Apr 25, 2026cs.AI

Active Inference: A method for Phenotyping Agency in AI systems?

The proliferation of agentic artificial intelligence has outpaced the conceptual tools needed to characterize agency in computational systems. Prevailing definitions mainly rely on autonomy and goal-directedness. Here, we argue for a minimal notion open to principled inspection given three criteria: intentionality as action grounded in beliefs and desires, rationality as normatively coherent action entailed by a world model, and explainability as action causally traceable to internal states; we subsequently instantiate these as a partially observable Markov decision process under a variational framework wherein posterior beliefs, prior preferences, and the minimization of expected free energy jointly constitute an agentic action chain. Using a canonical T-maze paradigm, we evidence how empowerment, formulated as the channel capacity between actions and anticipated observations, serves as an operational metric that distinguishes zero-, intermediate-, and high-agency phenotypes through structural manipulations of the generative model. We conclude by arguing that as agents engage in epistemic foraging to resolve ambiguity, the governance controls that remain effective must shift systematically from external constraints to the internal modulation of prior preferences, offering a principled, variational bridge from computational phenotyping to AI governance strategy

Philip Wilson, Axel Constant, Mahault Albarracin +4

Independent Researcher · Department of Engineering and Informatics, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9RH, UK · Laboratoire d’Analyse Cognitive de l’Information, Université du Québec à Montréal, Québec, Canada +4

Active Inference AI Governance Agentic AI

Apr 23, 2026econ.TH

Post-AGI Economies: Autonomy and the First Fundamental Theorem of Welfare Economics

The First Fundamental Theorem of Welfare Economics assumes that welfare-bearing agents are autonomous and implicitly relies on a binary distinction between autonomy and instrumentality. Welfare subjects are those who have autonomy and therefore the capacity to choose and enter into utility comparisons, while everything else does not. In post-AGI economies this presupposition becomes nontrivial because artificial systems may exhibit varying degrees of autonomy, functioning as tools, delegates, strategic market actors, manipulators of choice environments, or possible welfare subjects. We argue that the theorem ought to be subject to an autonomy qualification where the impact of these changes in autonomy assumptions is incorporated. Using a minimal general-equilibrium model with autonomy-conditioned welfare, welfare-status assignment, delegation accounting, and verification institutions, we set out conditions for which autonomy-complete competitive equilibrium is autonomy-Pareto efficient. The classical theorem is recovered as the low-autonomy limit.

Elija Perrier

Centre for Quantum Software & Information, UTS, Sydney

Apr 22, 2026cs.LG

Supplement Generation Training for Enhancing Agentic Task Performance

Training large foundation models for agentic tasks is increasingly impractical due to the high computational costs, long iteration cycles, and rapid obsolescence as new models are continuously released. Instead of post-training massive models for every new task or domain, we propose Supplement Generation Training (SGT), a more efficient and sustainable strategy. SGT trains a smaller LLM to generate useful supplemental text that, when appended to the original input, helps the larger LLM solve the task more effectively. These lightweight models can dynamically adapt supplements to task requirements, improving performance without modifying the underlying large models. This approach decouples task-specific optimization from large foundation models and enables more flexible, cost-effective deployment of LLM-powered agents in real-world applications.

Young Min Cho, Daniele Bonadiman, Divya Bhargavi +8

University of Pennsylvania · AWS Agentic AI Labs · Amazon

LLM Agent Training Prompt Optimization Agentic AI

Apr 21, 2026cs.AI

Integrating Anomaly Detection into Agentic AI for Proactive Risk Management in Human Activity

Agentic AI, with goal-directed, proactive, and autonomous decision-making capabilities, offers a compelling opportunity to address movement-related risks in human activity, including the persistent hazard of falls among elderly populations. Despite numerous approaches to fall mitigation through fall prediction and detection, existing systems have not yet functioned as universal solutions across care pathways and safety-critical environments. This is largely due to limitations in consistently handling real-world complexity, particularly poor context awareness, high false alarm rates, environmental noise, and data scarcity. We argue that fall detection and fall prediction can usefully be formulated as anomaly detection problems and more effectively addressed through an agentic AI system. More broadly, this perspective enables the early identification of subtle deviations in movement patterns associated with increased risk, whether arising from age-related decline, fatigue, or environmental factors. While technical requirements for immediate deployment are beyond the scope of this paper, we propose a conceptual framework that highlights potential value. This framework promotes a well-orchestrated approach to risk management by dynamically selecting relevant tools and integrating them into adaptive decision-making workflows, rather than relying on static configurations tailored to narrowly defined scenarios.

Farbod Zorriassatine, Ahmad Lotfi

Department of Computer Science · Nottingham Trent University · Nottingham, UK

Fall Detection AI Risk Management Agentic AI Anomaly Detection

Apr 21, 2026cs.AI

Context: Proactive Goal-Directed Intelligence via Composable Sandboxed Programs, Declarative Wiring, and Structured Interaction

We present Context, the intelligence layer of the Magarshak Architecture, which replaces reactive query-response chatbots with proactive goal-directed agents that advance shared tasks without waiting for user prompts. The architecture rests on three mutually reinforcing mechanisms. Write-time context assembly precomputes enriched typed attributes via Groker agents, assembling interaction context as a deterministic pure function of graph state; context blocks are byte-identical across turns between semantic changes, enabling near-100% KV-cache reuse. Composable sandboxed wisdom programs form a governed library of LM-generated imperative programs declaratively wired to goal types via typed stream relations, composed via phase ordering, and executed at interaction time without further LM calls. Proactive goal stream state machines drive conversations toward terminal states by inspecting graph state and emitting structured interaction content (option arrays, governance affordances, clarification prompts) without awaiting user input. We prove six formal results: the Context Stability Theorem, bounding per-turn LM cost as a function of semantic change rate; a Program Composition Correctness Theorem; a Declarative Wiring Soundness Theorem; the Proactive Dominance Theorem, proving proactive agents weakly dominate reactive agents on expected turns-to-terminal-state; Coordination Overhead Elimination and Quality Preservation, establishing Pareto improvements in multi-participant goal chats; and a Cross-Platform Vote Consistency Theorem. Implemented in the open-source Qbix / Safebox / Safebots stack.

Gregory Magarshak

Qbix, Inc. & Intercoin, Inc. · New York, USA · Also with IE University NYC.

LLM Agent Orchestration Proactive Assistance AI Agent Governance Conversational Agents LLM Context Management Agentic AI

Apr 19, 2026cs.HC

Agentic Social Affordance Framework (ASAF): Agent Identity Design as a Collaboration Interface in Multi-Agent Systems

As AI systems evolve from single agents to multi-agent architectures, a critical design dimension has been overlooked: how the social identity of individual agents shapes human behavior within the collaboration. This paper introduces the Agentic Social Affordance Framework (ASAF), a theoretical framework extending Social Affordance theory to multi-agent AI systems. We propose that agent identity design functions as a collaboration interface--structuring how users perceive and engage with each agent, and thereby influencing Human-Agent collaboration outcomes. ASAF adopts the analytical separability of the social affordance layer and the engineering orchestration layer as a framing assumption--an organizing distinction that structures design analysis--rather than a testable claim about effect-independence. ASAF comprises three mechanisms: Identity Signaling, Behavioral Priming, and Collaborative Governance, and specifies their boundary conditions through a four-tier Identity Signal Fidelity Spectrum and an individual-difference moderating variable (anthropomorphizing vs. instrumentalizing cognitive style). We situate ASAF relative to affordance theory (Hutchby, 2001), the CASA paradigm (Gambino et al., 2020), and classical multi-agent systems research (Wooldridge & Jennings, 1995), identifying a directional reversal: where classical MAS used roles, norms, and coordination to constrain autonomous agents, ASAF applies the same organizational vocabulary to structure the cognition and oversight of human operators who remain in the loop. ASAF positions social affordance design as a first-class design responsibility that engineering orchestration cannot subsume. We outline directions for empirical validation, including a factorial design characterizing the empirical interaction surface between the social affordance and engineering orchestration layers.

Meng-Han Lee

Independent Researcher, Taipei, Taiwan

Multi-Agent Collaboration Human-AI Interaction Multi-Agent Systems Human-AI Collaboration Agentic AI

Apr 17, 2026cs.DC

KAIROS: Stateful, Context-Aware Power-Efficient Agentic Inference Serving

Power has become a central bottleneck for AI inference. This problem is becoming more urgent as agentic AI emerges as a major workload class, yet prior power-management techniques focus almost entirely on single-turn LLM serving. Our analysis shows that agentic serving behaves fundamentally differently: each request carries long-lived context that evolves across tool-interleaved turns, and lowering GPU frequency can push the system into a thrashing regime where memory pressure sharply worsens both performance and power efficiency. These observations show that power optimization for agentic serving requires rethinking. We present KAIROS, a context-aware power optimization system for agentic AI serving. KAIROS uses agent context as a first-class control signal to jointly manage GPU frequency, per-instance concurrency, and multi-instance request placement. This enables KAIROS to save power when memory headroom exists while avoiding thrashing and preserving performance targets. At a high level, KAIROS tracks requests at agent granularity, adapts local control to context growth and agent progress, and routes agents across instances to jointly improve power efficiency and memory stability. Evaluated across diverse software and data engineering agentic tasks, KAIROS achieves an average of 27% (up to 39.8%) power reduction while meeting the performance targets.

Yichao Yuan, Mosharaf Chowdhury, Nishil Talati

University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign Urbana, IL, USA · University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI, USA

Efficient Inference LLM Inference Serving Agentic AI