Autonomy

Mission-level autonomy for disaster response, search and rescue, and tactical UGV operations requires repeated path and mission planning as terrain conditions, agent types, and objectives change. Pixel-grid search is costly for repeated kilometer-scale queries, while semantic abstractions must maintain valid costs and connectivity as conditions change. We present HOPHY (Hierarchical Off-Road Planning using Hypergraphs), a reusable hierarchical terrain representation that organizes map-scale terrain into geometrically connected semantic regions (GSNodes), connectivity-preserving critical regions (Coarse Regions), and typed hyperedges for terrain, agent, and weather context. Hyperedge intersections select affected regions and incident edges for state updates without rebuilding the hierarchy. Across real off-road maps spanning kilometer-scale areas, HOPHY achieves 100% planning success and less than 0.01% median cost deviation from the oracle (pixel A*), with substantially lower query and replanning latency than the evaluated pixel and abstraction baselines. Applied to a multi-robot task-allocation (MRTA) problem, these gains reduce total computation by 79x over pixel A* and 7.2x over the fastest abstraction baseline, with mission makespan comparable to pixel A*. Finally, we demonstrate HOPHY on a physical Clearpath Jackal that successfully executes a 1.5-km, eight-task mission across mixed-surface outdoor terrain and a blockage-triggered replanned route.

Adaptive security at the network edge increasingly relies on automated planners, including rule-based controllers, learned policies, and LLM-assisted agents, that translate observations into enforcement actions. Once such a planner can influence live policy state, syntactic validity is not enough. A semantically wrong action, produced from incomplete or manipulated observations, can be faithfully executed by an enforcement substrate that cannot judge mission context. We address this problem by treating the boundary between planner output and kernel enforcement input as the primary security object. We propose a split-control architecture in which an untrusted planner emits typed security intents, a deterministic governor checks each intent against safety, resource, temporal-stability, and proportionality invariants, and only admitted actions are bound to signed receipts and compiled into pre-installed eBPF map updates. The paper formalizes this trust-boundary problem, defines three threat classes, develops the governor admission predicate, and reports an end-to-end prototype. Across rule-based and LLM-assisted planners on a Raspberry Pi 5 testbed connected to the university 5G Test Network, the governor admits, rejects, and bounds intents at microsecond cost without disrupting protected-flow regularity. The contribution is conceptual as much as empirical: adaptive security does not need to trust the author of an action. It needs a mediation boundary that decides whether the action is admissible.

Proposed governance framework for autonomous robotic systems, introducing a three-layer compliance architecture (ARC) instantiated through model safety validation, cognitive certification benchmarks, and operational authorization standards.

Proactive in-cabin agents can help passengers understand automated-vehicle (AV) behavior, but communicating every ride event may introduce unnecessary interruptions. We investigated how communication should adapt to event priority and passenger activity. In a mixed-methods within-subject study, 41 participants rode as passenger in a VR simulated fully-automated vehicle. We compared an event-triggered (ET) policy that communicated immediately at every event with a context-sensitive (CS) policy that selected \textit{Immediate}, \textit{Delayed}, or \textit{Silent} communications. CS increased communication appropriateness and substantially reduced perceived interruption. Perceived trust did not differ between policies, although baselines dispositional trust differentiated communication preferences. Findings highlight event consequence, passenger activity, continuing information value, and confirmation need as key considerations for selective in-cabin communication.

Reliable online autonomy is critical for quadrotor operation in urban airspaces, where global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) measurements suffer from multipath, blockage, and latency issues, introducing non-stationary, temporally correlated errors that degrade conventional GNSS-IMU fusion. This paper presents a belief-adaptive online autonomy framework that augments an extended Kalman filter (EKF) with explicit GNSS trust modelling, second-order online belief adaptation, and latency-aware out-of-sequence measurement handling. GNSS trust is represented as a latent belief state that modulates measurement weighting and multipath bias uncertainty, and is updated online using EKF consistency signals. Unlike reactive covariance tuning, the proposed approach enables proactive and stable sensor trust adaptation without prior environmental knowledge or offline training. Evaluation in simulated urban air mobility scenarios with correlated multipath, stochastic latency, and obstacle constraints demonstrates improved belief convergence, smoother trajectories, and reduced estimation and tracking errors compared to naive, adaptive, and first-order baselines. The framework preserves classical GNSS-IMU fusion structure and can be integrated directly into existing flight control pipelines, supporting robust online autonomy in GNSS degraded environments.

In recent years, artificial intelligence has made extraordinary progress thanks to large-scale models capable of generalization and the generation of complex outputs. However, transferring this potential into embodied agents reveals a significant limitation: the most advanced systems rely on pre-existing datasets and human feedback strategies that are powerful but insufficient in dynamic or unknown contexts. To adapt, an agent must acquire knowledge through direct interaction with its environment. One strategy to address this challenge involves introducing higher-level mechanisms, such as intrinsic motivations, which leverage curiosity and competence, to guide exploration and learning in complex environments. While this flexibility expands autonomy, it complicates the task of ensuring agents remain aligned with human goals. Alignment, already a challenge for artificial systems in general, becomes even more complex in unstructured and dynamic contexts where predefined rules prove insufficient. To be effective and adaptable, norms must be rooted in experience through an epistemological process that starting from simple, situated principles allows for the gradual construction of more complex rules through experience, autonomous learning, and cooperation with other moral agents. Similarly to children learning social norms by exploring their environment and participating in collective practices, artificial agents must also be educated toward alignment. Following Dennett, the status of a moral agent is not innate but is attributed gradually based on the ability to responsibly manage increasing degrees of freedom. From this perspective, the regulatory sandboxes can be viewed as pedagogical environments for AI: dynamic spaces where alignment develops as a formative process, progressively shaping autonomous behaviors through interaction and cooperation in scenarios of increasing complexity.

Frontier AI systems function as \emph{constitutional institutions}: each deployed model encodes an implicit ranking among safety, helpfulness, honesty, autonomy, and equity. We ask whether the supply of frontier constitutional types covers human demand. Combining a paraphrase-controlled audit of the as-shipped default constitutions of $23$ frontier LLM archetypes with a pairwise-tradeoff study of $1{,}649$ US participants on the same instrument, we report three facts. \emph{Demand is broad}: it spans all five values, with the largest constituency under one-third. \emph{Supply is narrow and drifting}: the $23$-archetype hull occupies ${\sim}2\%$ of the demand hull under conservative noise-matched estimation ($0.10\%$ at full audit precision), no archetype puts helpfulness or autonomy first ($37\%$ of users are constitutionally homeless), and across six model families autonomy decreases in $5/6$, equity increases in $5/6$, and safety increases in $4/6$, with monotone within-family version trends (order-permutation $p = 0.013$) and the autonomy decline concentrated in scenarios where safety is not at stake. The drift's importance is directional: \emph{away} from a value already undercovered, mechanically worsening the welfare floor for the least-served users. \emph{The fix is sparse}: a $2$-vertex menu $\{e_{\mathrm{HON}}, e_{\mathrm{AUT}}\}$ beats the full $23$-archetype frontier by $47\%$ on mean regret (CI $[43\%, 52\%]$); three vertex additions cut mean/worst-group regret by up to $81\%$/$64\%$. We formalize these findings as a budgeted-pluralism trilemma, show the binding regime is empirically realized, and verify the conclusions are robust to distance-based welfare and to degraded routing. The instrument and audit harness are described in full in the appendices.

AI agents pose significant risks as they are granted increasing autonomy. A commonly proposed solution is human oversight and keeping a ''human in the loop'', but this is not a simple solution: Not only do current approaches to AI agent design impede effective human oversight, but the cognitive capacities required for it are also themselves degraded by extended use of AI systems. This position paper argues that current approaches to the development and deployment of AI agent systems do not support effective human oversight -- they contribute to its degradation. To address this, a top priority in the advancement of AI agents should be supporting the situated goals and cognitive requirements of effective human oversight, treating the human needs of overseers at the same level of importance as AI agent capability. To put this idea into practice, we connect work on automation and human-computer interaction to AI agent processes, outlining design-level affordances and organizational protocols that (1) support overseers in exercising critical judgement and (2) counteract the skill atrophy that arises from extended use of automation. We urge developers and deployers to adopt these or similar approaches. Without explicit support for the cognitive demands of effective human-agent interaction, AI agent systems will continue to passively incentivize the degradation of the very human skills they rely on.

A central goal in robot learning is to move beyond task-specific human data collection toward robots that improve through autonomous interaction. Yet fully autonomous learning remains difficult with current policies: sparse rewards and weak zero-shot exploration make it unlikely that a robot will discover successful behavior from scratch. We study minimal-data adaptation, a regime in which a pre-trained robot policy must learn a new task from as little as one demonstration followed by autonomous online interaction. This setting serves as the closest tractable proxy for fully autonomous improvement, allowing us to study whether minimal human guidance can bootstrap autonomous learning and what algorithmic ingredients make it feasible. We build MiDAS, a simple offline-to-online RL recipe that first anchors a pre-trained VLA to the target task with behavior cloning on single/few demonstrations, then improves it through value-based online RL on a residual policy parameterization. Across LIBERO and RoboCasa, MiDAS recovers strong task performance from as little as one demonstration, substantially outperforming baselines and generalizing beyond demonstrated conditions. We further evaluate MiDAS on a bimanual YAM platform. Starting from a fragile low-success policy obtained from a single demonstration, MiDAS improves its robustness and learns new successful behaviors over ~6 hours of online interaction. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first demonstration of reliable robot policy adaptation from a single task demonstration.

Gamification is especially effective in learning domains requiring active problem-solving and iterative skill-building, such as cybersecurity education. Generative AI agents offer a path to delivering such experiences adaptively at scale, but introduce well-documented risks in educational settings: inconsistent behavior, hallucinated reasoning, and misalignment with pedagogical frameworks. Grounding these systems in learning science is therefore essential. We present \model, an agentic framework for gamified cybersecurity learning that enables structured autonomy through ontology-guided validation, schema-governed behavioral control, and competency-based progression. The system is organized around a competency-based progression model that structures topics by difficulty and prerequisite relationships, reflecting evidence-based principles of scaffolded instruction. The learning loop is decomposed into four specialized agents: challenge, support, evaluation, and reward, each governed by behavioral schemas that encode operational modes and progression logic, bounding agent autonomy without eliminating generative flexibility. A cybersecurity ontology validates all generated content prior to display, enforcing domain-consistent reasoning and safety constraints. We evaluate CyberAgents through classroom deployment with undergraduate students, complemented by expert evaluations from educators and domain specialists. Results indicate improved engagement, clearer feedback interpretation, and greater learner trust in AI-generated responses when behavioral schemas and ontology validation are active. Preliminary comparisons with an unconstrained configuration further support the role of structured control in stabilizing instructional behavior. These findings offer a blueprint for designing pedagogically grounded agentic gamified learning systems.

Artificial intelligence is changing the task composition of computing work faster than curricula and training typically adapt. This is a curriculum-framework paper, grounded in a structured narrative review of labor-market and software-engineering evidence and illustrated through an exploratory pilot course: the review supports the framework, and the pilot illustrates it rather than serving as primary evidence. The central claim is that near-term change is task reallocation rather than full replacement: routine implementation is increasingly automated while verification, systems thinking, security, and the ability to supervise and orchestrate AI (keeping a human in the loop) gain value. We organize the response as a capability-assurance framework anchored by a Capability Ladder: a five-level progression (trigger, automation, workflow, AI agent, agent team) that classifies the operational autonomy of AI-augmented work and the human supervision it requires. We map the ladder to course-level updates, workload-aware assessment, and stackable workforce credentials, and illustrate it through a two-semester pilot of a team-based, no-code course enrolling computing and business students. We argue for targeted modernization around durable capabilities rather than wholesale curriculum replacement, and we are explicit about evidence limits: labor signals are confounded by non-AI forces, industry reports are directional, and the pilot is exploratory.

Long-context LLM inference is bottlenecked by quadratic attention computation and growing KV-cache costs. Existing sparse attention and KV-compression methods typically decide which tokens or heads to preserve from runtime attention scores, observation windows, calibration prompts, or learned gates, making head diagnosis input-dependent and costly to deploy. We propose Autonomy-of-Heads (AoH), a data-free method that identifies retrieval and streaming heads from the spectral geometry of query-key projections. AoH defines the kernel attention operator $M_h = W_K^{h\top}W_Q^h$ and uses its effective-rank as a weight-space measure of head function: concentrated spectra indicate a small number of dominant query-key matching directions and are associated with retrieval heads, whereas diffuse spectra indicate the absence of a dominant global matching direction and are associated with streaming heads. We further derive an efficient $d_\text{head}$-dimensional computation that avoids constructing the full $d_\text{model}\times d_\text{model}$ matrix. We conducted extensive experiments across models demonstrating that at 50% sparsity, AoH retains 96.5% of Full Attention performance on average while reducing prefill and decode latency by up to 41.4% and 66.0%, respectively, and KV-cache memory by 50.0% at 256K tokens.

Care robots are increasingly being introduced into healthcare settings, raising important questions about their acceptance and ethical implementation. To better understand these challenges, this study investigates caregivers' perceptions of four categories of care robots: delivering supplies, helping patients into bed, monitoring vital signs, and assisting with mobility. We conducted a mixed-methods study employing a mixed-factorial design in which 298 caregivers from the United States, Mexico, and Chile evaluated all four robot categories. Quantitative measures integrated constructs from the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology, the Cognitive-Affective-Normative model, and overall acceptance ratings. Qualitative data were collected through open-ended questions and analyzed using a literature-informed ethical framework. The results indicate that participants across countries generally evaluated care robots positively, particularly for logistical and physically demanding tasks rather than those requiring intensive interpersonal interaction. The qualitative findings provide further insight into stakeholders' views of the ethical implications of care robot use. Participants emphasized potential benefits such as reduced workload, lower risk, and greater patient autonomy, while also expressing concerns about dependability, the need for human oversight, and potential job displacement. Although many ethical concerns were shared across countries, participants differed in how they interpreted and prioritized them. These findings advance a context-sensitive and socially informed understanding of responsible design and implementation of care robots.

Deploying LLM agents into industrial recommender operations exposes a three-way tension we frame as the autonomy-determinism-efficiency trilemma: general autonomy (interpreting operator intent, generating glue code zero-shot), industrial determinism (schema-conforming feature extraction, non-crashing A/B, zero compliance-path hallucination), and end-to-end efficiency. Any two can be maximized against the third. We present RecSys Factory, an LLM-agent platform deployed for 78 days across three heterogeneous Tencent recommender business lines. The design principle is autonomy at decision points, not over pipelines, made concrete through three deconstructions that each discharge one vertex of the trilemma. Runtime is deconstructed into three host-emitted event sources (Claude Code Stop hooks, corporate-IM webhooks, workflow scheduler APIs): the platform carries no long-running daemon during the wait phase and consumes zero CPU during the 94% of wall-clock spent waiting on Spark or GPU jobs. Capability is deconstructed into a 29-file skill ecosystem (8,971 lines of SKILL.md) whose per-skill pitfall tables mechanically compile into a 400-entry PitfallStore, confining autonomy to bounded typed decision surfaces inside pre-committed pipelines. Deployment spans three business lines with disjoint label semantics, A/B layer topologies, and operator personas; an onboarding-time compression is observed on two of the three and is reported as a case-study observation, not a generalization claim, and not measured against a controlled pre-platform baseline. The human is retained at the diagnostic-versus-execution boundary via a human-in-the-loop card protocol, deployed as an audit-trail primitive (schema-validated, idempotent, replayable) and reported from an 8-day 16-run pilot. Across the 78-day window the platform recorded 1,624 CLI-tool dispatches at a 78.6% aggregate success rate.

Autonomous embodied agents must sustain a long decision-making loop that involves perceiving, acting, verifying, and self-correcting over many steps. Current systems sustain this loop through task-specific workflows or embodied policies. However, these fixed workflows and policies offer limited flexibility across environments and often lack effective recovery strategies when execution goes wrong. We find that a general-purpose agent can instead sustain the loop on its own. We term this organization agentic embodied control: the reasoning model directly steers every action, keeping reasoning and control aligned. Using zero-shot navigation as a controlled testbed, we equip three coding-agent harnesses with only a monocular RGB camera and discrete actions. At default effort, replicated opus-5 runs average $70.7\pm3.5$% success, while fable-5 reaches 78% at maximum effort. When a trained waypoint tool is offered alongside primitives, the hybrid fable-5 agent reaches $76.7\pm0.6$% at default effort, using half the environment steps and under a quarter of the wall time. Across the ablations, model choice dominates performance variation. Observed harness differences are modest, and forced waypoints help weaker models but can hinder stronger ones. Although longer horizons, latency, and context growth remain barriers to sustained autonomy, these results show that a general-purpose model can already achieve competitive embodied control without a navigation policy.

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.

Regulating activities where regulatees use autonomous and agentic AI is challenging. Regulatory assumptions about regulatee knowledge and control no longer hold true; much of that lies elsewhere in the AI supply chain which thus needs to be brought within the scope of regulation. Governance systems for autonomous AI cannot replicate existing governance models, but need a fresh approach. Retrospective supervisory oversight becomes ineffective as a risk management tool, and AI autonomy generates new systemic risks which require new solutions. This paper investigate four regulatory systems: UK regulation of content platforms, data protection, UK financial services, and the EU AI Act'92s cross-sectoral regime. It analyses the challenges posed by autonomous and agentic AI and proposes potential solutions which regulators might adopt. These will transform regulation from a reactive process to an active one, and assist it in adapting to the challenges of AI autonomy.

AI has begun to write systems code: agents now synthesize, verify, and deploy system components. Despite this shift, "AI-native" remains a marketing term with no precise technical definition. This paper gives it one. We define AI-nativeness along a single axis---authority over the system's own decisions rather than by the capability of the underlying AI models. Building on a decision-level model of a system, we distinguish occupancy (who executes a decision) from revision authority (who may change it), organize revision authority into a ladder---self-tuning, self-rewriting, self-architecting and define a system as AI-native when an AI autonomously rewrites the system's own implementations. The definition further requires an escalation detector, a verification procedure, and a verified fallback, while leaving purpose and correctness human-owned.

Existing AI measurement frameworks quantify cognitive capability, task automation, or catastrophic risk, but none measure autonomous agency: the extent to which a system behaves in a self-directed way. A system can saturate capability benchmarks while remaining entirely reactive, acting only when prompted and ceasing all activity when a task completes. We introduce the Autonomous Agency Scale (AAS), a behavioral framework that scores AI systems on a 0-5 lexicon across seven dimensions of agency: cognitive autonomy, temporal persistence, environmental agency, social agency, creative agency, self-awareness, and goal formation, each operationalized by falsifiable threshold tests. Every dimension is scored in two temporal bands: an Active band covering engaged, user-initiated activity, and an Ambient band covering idle periods. Ambient Level 4 is gated by the Idle-Gap Test, a counterfactual criterion (remove all triggers and observe whether internally derived activity persists) that separates self-direction from scheduled rule-following. We apply the scale to six contemporary systems spanning task agents (Claude Code, Manus, Hermes), consumer assistants (ChatGPT, Siri), and a persistent companion architecture (Airi). The two-band profile quantifies a boundary that single-score frameworks conflate: task agents reach Active composites of 2.3-2.4 while scoring 0.6-1.9 Ambient, with every idle-period behavior attributable to user-configured schedules, whereas the companion architecture, evaluated longitudinally, is the only assessed system whose idle-period behavior survives trigger removal. We discuss limitations, including single-rater provenance, developer-evaluator bias on the longitudinal assessment, and the partially operationalized self-direction boundary in the Active band.

Teleoperating a robotic manipulator in industrial environments demands precision that camera-based interfaces alone struggle to deliver. The operator must align the end-effector with a target in clutter, under limited depth perception, and without colliding with the surrounding structures. This paper presents a shared-autonomy framework that assists the operator throughout this process. A single RGB-D camera captures the operator's arm motion and hand gestures without wearables, fiducials, or a calibration stage. The intended target is specified by a free-form text prompt, grounded by a vision-language model in the robot's gripper camera, and tracked across its onboard cameras by a promptable video-segmentation model, resulting in a grasp frame continuously separated from the obstacle map. Every commanded motion is executed by a GPU-accelerated model-predictive controller that enforces self- and environment-collision avoidance against an online volumetric reconstruction, while a potential field corrects the operator's reference toward the grounded target during the final approach. An autonomous mode can be gesture-triggered to complete the grasp on the same target without a separate perception pipeline. The framework is validated on a quadruped mobile manipulator. The interface achieves a positional RMSE of 59 mm relative to motion-capture ground truth, and the controller keeps the arm at least 18 cm from obstacles while the operator deliberately commands the arm into them by 6 cm. In an industrial valve manipulation and a pick-and-place task, the full framework succeeded in all trials, while ablating either the collision or the assistance module produced failures through complementary mechanisms, and autonomous execution succeeded in four of five trials per task.

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.

AI-Augmented Business Process Management Systems (ABPMS) enhance traditional BPMS by leveraging advanced AI techniques to define, execute, and monitor complex process structures. Within this landscape, Framed Autonomy denotes the capability of a system to autonomously advance the execution of a Business Process (BP) instance while strictly adhering to a predefined frame, i.e., a set of constraints that may span multiple perspectives. Existing research on framed autonomy has predominantly focused on control-flow constraints, either declarative or procedural, and typically relies on their transformation into automata-based representations. In this study, we extend this line of work by introducing a novel tool for what-if analysis that augments the process frame with multi-perspective constraints, including data-aware and temporal conditions. Given a partial process execution, the proposed approach exploits this enriched frame to recommend optimal continuations in compliance with the underlying process specifications. We additionally report an empirical evaluation demonstrating the scalability and effectiveness of the technique, thereby highlighting its potential for supporting autonomous and constraint-aware decision making in ABPMS.

Modern autonomous vehicles largely operate as isolated agents: they rely on on-board perception and decision modules and broadcast Basic Safety Messages (BSMs) that expose only low-level kinematic state. While existing cooperative driving frameworks enable limited sensor sharing, they rarely communicate high-level maneuver intentions, and edge computing is primarily used for content delivery rather than decision arbitration. As a result, current connected autonomy lacks a principled mechanism for making globally consistent, intent-aware coordination decisions across vehicles. To address this gap, we propose MIND-CAVs, a Multi-Intelligence Negotiation and Decision framework for connected autonomous vehicles (CAVs) based on intent-driven autonomy. Each vehicle abstracts raw sensor observations into structured intent representations, exchanges them over V2X links, and receives globally consistent coordination plans from roadside edge servers. Edge agents combine learned and rule-based arbitration mechanisms to negotiate conflicting intents among vehicles, while a cloud platform records decisions for auditing and continual retraining. We implement MIND-CAVs in a CARLA-based AI-in-the-loop platform and evaluate it in multi-lane highway scenarios involving conflicting maneuvers and route-constrained exits. Experimental results show improved maneuver completion time and reduced unsafe proximity and unnecessary braking compared with isolated autonomy, first-come-first-served arbitration, and multi-agent reinforcement learning baselines.

Modern industrial environments increasingly run many autonomous subsystems at once - schedulers, energy managers, vehicle fleets - each pursuing its own goals while sharing the same physical resources. Because high-level human intentions are translated into low-level control logic and then discarded, no running component can tell whether it is still doing what was actually intended, and goal conflicts surface only after they have caused a missed target or a shutdown. We propose the Intention Abstraction Layer (IAL), a domainagnostic middleware that represents intentions as first-class, persistent, and explainable runtime objects: a large language model grounded in a formal OWL ontology parses naturallanguage goals into structured intentions, a consistency monitor detects conflicts at registration time, before execution, and a transparency module explains them in natural language. We report a first proof of concept in which two autonomous agents register conflicting production and energy intentions, and the IAL flags and explains the conflict before it reaches the execution layer. The result is a mechanism that shifts behavioral assurance for cooperating autonomous systems from post-hoc failure analysis to pre-execution, intention-level checking.

Logistics systems increasingly mix \emph{autonomous logistic equipment} (ALE) with non-autonomous machinery under a central control system (CS), where the best decision-maker depends on who holds the most current world model, yet authority is fixed at design time. When an ALE's local model and the CS global model diverge, both act on incompatible beliefs and produce deadlocks that resource-based handling neither explains nor prevents. We propose the World-Model-Aware Responsibility Framework (WMARF), which assigns authority dynamically from CS world-model quality and equipment automation level, and classifies deadlocks by the state of authority -- none, in transition, or divergent. In a discrete-event simulation of two ALE converging on a semi-automated transfer point, reproduced over the VDA~5050 interface, a divergence deadlock under static control is prevented by a proximity-triggered handoff. Because authority follows information quality rather than a shared protocol, the scheme stays valid as autonomy grows.

Integrating mobile robots into human teams promises significant capability improvements for tasks such as searching hazardous environments. Unlike existing teleoperated robots, future robot systems will increasingly be endowed with some level of artificial intelligence (AI), giving them a degree of autonomy in how they pursue mission goals. This autonomy could make a human-agent (robot) team more effective but also put inter-agent trust under strain if robots make a mistake, or (appear to) pursue task priorities that conflict with the team's best interest. During a mission, agents' trust states are anticipated to vary according to the situation as understood by each teammate (trustor). If component-level (agent) or system-level trust falls below sufficient levels for cooperative tasks to be completed, it could critically affect mission success . We argue that active trust management will be an important precondition for the success of human-robot teams (HRTs, a subcategory of human-agent teams with embodied agents), especially in dynamic, high-risk environments. We present a trust satisficing perspective which acknowledges and attempts to account for the fluctuating, multi-faceted, and context-dependent nature of trust and trust requirements even under normal operating conditions. Our outline of a trust management framework for human-robot teaming includes online measurement of proxy metrics for trust, closed-loop adaptation of robot behavior, and variable autonomy to give space for human responsibility in situations requiring value judgements. We refer to a recent experimental exploration of 'swift trust' and a novel behavioral trust metric for HRT, and we highlight issues for further investigation.

AI-enabled systems are seeing increasing deployment across numerous domains, with many being "black boxes" with respect to core functions and capabilities. I.e., many systems take inputs and give outputs, but without users having any ability to see how the former lead to the latter. AI-enabled systems are also being used to augment autonomy in systems, and autonomy coupled with opacity raises numerous concerns surrounding, e.g., the reliability of systems, their regularity in functioning, human ability to control them, or whether deploying opaque and potentially autonomous systems is in compliance with ethical and legal norms. In this article, we argue that many of these worries can be mitigated by leveraging practical judgment, virtue, and intuition in the deployment and use of opaque AI-enabled systems. We show that focusing on these distinctly human capabilities provides a means for bridging between the practical challenges created by opacity and the ethical, legal, and social norms underpinning particular domains. We argue that a core element in doing this is a recognition that many positive human traits are not quantifiable and we therefore must develop training regimen and guidelines on AI deployment anchored in humanistic but non-quantifiable values. Throughout the article, we focus on the military domain as an exemplar of the importance of practical judgment, virtue, and intuition as drivers for ethical and effective human decision-making surrounding AI deployments, but the underlying arguments apply to all domains where opaque and potentially autonomous systems are being deployed (subject to domain-specific alterations).

Large language model (LLM) agents can plan, use tools, maintain memory, and execute long-horizon tasks. This paper proposes Self-Aware Recursively Self-Improving (SARSI) agents: governed agents that maintain a persistent self-model of identity, goals, capabilities, limitations, uncertainty, relationships, history, and developmental change, and use that model to guide and evaluate recursive improvement. Self-awareness is defined functionally and does not imply subjective experience or phenomenal consciousness. We pair SARSI agents with personal singularity, a bounded human-AI co-development objective in which an agent ecosystem helps a user approach an expanding, user-defined feasible capability frontier. Each agent has a goal contract, bounded scope, validated tool registry, tool tests, end-to-end benchmarks, owner-controlled autonomy, routing, memory, self-model, and improvement policy. A scope router assigns every accepted task to one accountable primary agent and transfers out-of-scope work through structured handoffs. A user-facing Auto-Index selects interactive, hybrid, autonomous, or scheduled behavior without overriding external permissions. The architecture combines a planner-executor-verifier loop, an evidence-gated improvement loop, an external governance plane, decentralized lineages, an owner-directed agent foundry, and a Personal Singularity OS coordinating working, computational-imaging, work-process-learning, and personal-learning agents. We formalize functional self-awareness, scope, routing, improvement acceptance, bounded goal evolution, tool-first execution, and human capability transfer, and provide safety invariants, benchmark design, and a staged implementation roadmap. This is a position and systems-design paper, not evidence that consciousness, unrestricted recursive self-improvement, or personal singularity has been achieved.

One year ago, the AISLE roadmap argued that autonomous laboratories operated as isolated islands and proposed a grassroots network organized around five critical dimensions. The field has since moved faster than anticipated. Multi-agent systems have produced experimentally validated hypotheses, self-driving laboratories have grown more interoperable and orchestrated, reasoning-trained and domain foundation models have raised the capability ceiling, and the Genesis Mission has placed autonomous experimentation at the center of U.S. federal science strategy, with industry emerging as a primary actor. Progress has met a sobering counter-current, including a corrected flagship discovery result, benchmarks showing that agents which rival experts on closed-ended questions still complete only a fraction of open-ended research, and fabricated citations surfacing at leading venues. We read this as the defining tension of the field. Producing a candidate discovery is no longer the hard part, but verifying it is, and this asymmetry now limits autonomous science more than raw model capability. We update the roadmap around seven dimensions, revisiting the original five and elevating two former cross-cutting concerns, trust, verification, and reproducibility, and safety, security, and governance, to first-class status. We assess the original milestones (M1 through M14) as achieved, partially achieved, reframed, or open, add four new milestones (M15 through M18), and scope the path forward to a two-year horizon. The first year concentrates on interfaces, protocol adoption, and the scaffolding of verification, and the second targets federation, zero-trust coordination, and governance. Throughout, we position the grassroots network as the interoperability fabric that lets national programs, international initiatives, and commercial platforms connect rather than re-silo.

The growing ability of large language models and vision language models to jointly interpret and reason over images and text is reshaping medical agents, moving them from task specific predictors toward autonomous systems that perceive, reason, plan, remember, and act in clinical environments. This work departs from the capability first perspective of existing literature and instead begins from clinical deployment, asking what tasks, contamination resistant benchmarks, and interactive training environments are required before medical agents can be trusted in practice. Medical agents are formalized as sequential decision making systems under partial observability, together with a three level autonomy taxonomy spanning assisted, cooperative, and fully autonomous operation. The field is organized along a unified scaling spine consisting of framework scaling, capability scaling, and environment scaling. Within this framework, clinical environment scaling, the integration of tools, data, and clinical gyms, is identified as the most actionable yet underexplored direction for agents operating in PACS, EHR, and FHIR ecosystems. Clinical self evolution, where agents improve through interaction with their environments rather than parameter scaling alone, is further positioned as a key research frontier, drawing insights from self improving agents, agent gyms, and test time compute scaling. Applications across radiology, pathology, ophthalmology, and hospital workflows are examined together with deployment challenges including hallucination, cascading failures, and fairness. By consolidating more than 300 references, with particular emphasis on advances from 2025 to 2026, this work provides a roadmap toward trustworthy, self improving medical imaging systems for real clinical practice.

AI systems increasingly participate in their own improvement: revising their outputs, adapting their own harnesses during deployment, training on data they generate, and, increasingly, conducting AI research itself. This literature is described under a vocabulary ("self-refine," "self-reward," "self-play," "self-evolve") that conflates fundamentally different ambitions. We survey 1,250 arXiv papers (2024-2026) along two axes: what the system improves -- its behavior in deployment, its policy through training, its evaluator, or the research process itself -- and the degree of loop closure (human-in-the-loop to fully closed). The taxonomy separates bounded self-refinement -- convergent, evaluable, and already industrial practice -- from open-ended recursive self-improvement (RSI), which remains bounded by grounding requirements, collapse dynamics, and compute constraints on every measured axis. Its distinctive feature is a dedicated category for self-evaluation: every improvement loop is a claim that some signal can substitute for human judgment. We survey the evaluator design space -- judges, process reward models, verifiers, rubrics, meta-evaluation -- order the signals into a verification hierarchy from formal verifiers (strongest) to intrinsic self-assessment (weakest), and observe that demonstrated self-improvement strength tracks this hierarchy, that its failure modes (self-confirming loops, model collapse, diversity collapse) follow from its violations, and that the "research direction-setting" bottleneck keeping humans in the loop sits at the top of that hierarchy. We connect the technical literature to the theory of RSI limits and to the safety and governance questions raised by frontier-lab accounts of closing the loop, and identify governance-grade measurement of self-improvement as the field's most underpopulated niche.

Safety for generalist robots is usually discussed in terms of motion or dialogue. We argue a third question is missing: should the robot take its first hard-to-undo social action at all, such as a greeting, an uninvited grasp, or stepping into someone's space? We call this initiation authorization. Current frameworks rarely treat it as a separate safety layer. Today's stacks often skip this step: a high engagement score or a confident VLA rollout is treated as permission to act. But seeing a person is not the same as having their consent to be addressed. We frame initiation authorization within generalist-robot safety and contrast it with post-plan VLA guardrails, implementing PAS (probe-authorize-speak) on a doorway humanoid, comparing it with direct-init on logged traces, and proposing a three-condition user study, with open questions on metrics, governance, and where initiation ends and foundation-model generation begins.

Limited flight endurance significantly restricts the operational range of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in long duration missions such as surveillance and inspection, where multiple spatially distributed Areas of Interest (AOIs) must be visited. These tasks require efficient routing determining the sequence of visits which directly impacts mission time, energy consumption, and overall feasibility. Pairing UAVs with unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) for mobile recharging offers a promising solution, but introduces a tightly coupled cooperative routing problem involving UAV route planning, UGV road constrained movement, energy management, and rendezvous scheduling under uncertainty. In this work, we present an integrated planning and autonomy framework for reliable field deployment. We formulate the problem as an energy constrained cooperative routing task and solve it using a Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) based planner that jointly optimizes the UAV visitation sequence and rendezvous locations with the UGV, outperforming baseline heuristics in minimizing total mission time. To bridge the gap between planning and execution, we introduce a standardized two layer YAML based mission API that captures environment states and structures lightweight, synchronized action sequences. This framework is supported by a complete autonomy stack using PX4/MAVSDK for UAV control and ROS 2/Nav2 for UGV navigation. Furthermore, we propose a lightweight Rendezvous Aware Replanner (RARP) that operates online to handle environmental uncertainties, reducing energy margin violations from 83.33% to 20.00%. The full system is validated through outdoor field experiments, demonstrating robust cooperative navigation and adaptability in dynamic tasks, including a search and rescue scenario with vision language model (VLM) based hazard detection

While personalisation is becoming a defining capability in human-robot interaction (HRI), the existing literature on responsible personalisation remains fragmented, offering isolated accounts of ethical risks without a structured understanding of how they emerge across interaction contexts. This gap is particularly critical in HRI, where robots' embodiment and social presence can amplify and reshape such risks or generate new types of risks. We present a lifecycle-based and context-sensitive framework for personalised HRI, grounded in an embodiment-aware perspective. The framework combines stages of the personalisation process with interaction characteristics (short-term vs. long-term, open-domain vs. closed-domain), enabling systematic analysis of how risks arise and evolve. Building on this, we conduct an integrative analysis of key ethical risks, including autonomy erosion, biased user modelling, manipulation, dehumanisation, and privacy violations, and examine how they manifest across contexts. We translate these insights into actionable design recommendations and outline open research challenges. By structuring both the design space and risk landscape of personalised HRI, this work provides a foundation for more systematic, transparent, and ethically grounded approaches to personalised robot behaviour.

The rapid integration of large language model-based agents into recommender systems has driven a shift from static, ranking-based pipelines toward autonomous and interactive systems that can reason, plan, and act. This survey provides a comprehensive overview of this emerging landscape by introducing a unified taxonomy grounded in the level of autonomy and three core paradigms of agentic recommender systems: agent-assisted recommendation, agent-as-recommender, and agent-as-user-simulator. The autonomy framework organizes existing methods along increasing capabilities in proactivity, context awareness, interaction flexibility, and adaptivity. Building on this framework, the survey analyzes how each paradigm adopts different agentic architectures and how agents enhance key components such as profiles, memory, tool use, workflows, and optimization mechanisms. We further examine evaluation methodologies for agentic recommendation, covering automated metrics, LLM-based judging, and simulation-based assessment, and discuss their limitations in capturing reasoning quality, user experience, and system behavior. Beyond existing evaluation protocols, we further discuss unresolved issues in evaluating agentic recommender systems, including trajectory-level assessment, agent contribution analysis, and calibration of user simulation. Lastly, the survey outlines open challenges in lifelong user modeling, contextual abstraction, multimodal alignment, controllability, trustworthiness, privacy, scalability, and efficiency. Together, these analyses establish a unified foundation for understanding the current progress of agentic recommender systems and highlight promising opportunities for developing more autonomous, reliable, and human-aligned recommendation agents.

When is a material system a candidate for life at all? We argue that this question is prior to behavior, functional architecture, or computational capacity, and that at root it is one of physical admissibility. We develop a framework in which minimal autonomy, taken in the interactivist sense of normativity grounded in self-maintaining far-from-equilibrium organization, corresponds to a distinct non-equilibrium phase of matter, and we take complex plasmas, a physical and non-biological system, as its in-materio exemplar. We formalize a diagnostic phase-space whose criteria (sustained free-energy throughput, organizational closure, active information maintenance, and regulated noise sensitivity) constitute necessary conditions for life-attribution. We instantiate the diagnostics across contrasting systems and fix the boundaries of the phase space via Bénard convection as a driven baseline lacking closure, and a digital self-replicating soup that carries measured informational heredity while its physical closure remains a structural zero. We demonstrate that plasmas satisfy every admissibility condition for minimal physical autonomy while carrying none of the informational heredity that open-ended evolution requires, sharpening the distinction between physical admissibility and biological sufficiency, and bounding downstream questions of machine sentience.

Least privilege, the principle that an identity should hold only the permissions strictly required for its task, has been a foundational primitive of access control for decades. We argue that this principle is insufficient for agentic AI systems, which do not merely hold permissions but can combine, approve, and amplify them across workflows and system boundaries. We propose least autonomy as an appropriate generalization and develop a formal theory. First, we define a compositional blast radius d(a,b) that measures structural separation between actions in an enterprise hierarchy, combining an ultrametric tree with lattice-valued confidentiality, integrity, and control-context labels. Second, we define a directed agent influence graph G(theta). An arc from U to V requires a directed shared-resource write-to-read meeting or a conservative undirected agent-to-agent (A2A) communication meeting, and a meeting-conditioned influence potential at or above an externally selected policy threshold theta. A catalogue-radius profile supports calibration and audit of theta. Finally, we define a collusion predicate over graph reachability that detects authorization composition, decision manipulation, and cross-domain capability composition.

Autonomous agents, whether LLM-driven software agents or robotic physical agents, face a common class of failure modes when operating without continuous human oversight: safety violations from unverified actions, behavioral instability from unconstrained loops, and continuity loss from unhandled error states. We develop \system{}, a discrete-time control system that combines five execution gears (\Gobs{}, \Gsug{}, \Gplan{}, \Gexec{}, \Gint{}) with utility-gated dispatch and event-driven fallback. For the single-agent case, we prove monotonic stability, execution safety, eventual stabilization, fallback completeness, and equivalence to a gear-constrained Markov decision process. For multi-agent cyber-physical systems (CPS), we apply the established \smart{} managed-autonomy lifecycle and map runtime evidence into its four governance states (\Stable{}/\Meta{}/\Assisted{}/\Regulated{}). Consensus gating, swarm-level Lyapunov analysis, per-agent gear authority, and rendezvous control provide distributed safety and stability guarantees, including zero collision under the stated assumptions. We evaluate the resulting runtime on a three-agent UR5 robotic assembly cell using fault magnitudes calibrated from the NIST \emph{Degradation Measurement of Robot Arm Position Accuracy} dataset across 10,000 Monte Carlo episodes. It achieves a 99.6% anomaly detection rate versus 2.1% for the single-agent baseline, reduces detection latency by $3.5\times$, and supplies a formal physical-workspace safety certificate. The execution gears act as micro-level permissions beneath the \smart{} runtime governance states, separating action control from autonomy governance.

Emotional bonds between humans and AI companions are growing, and the question of whether a person may marry an AI system will soon move from speculative fiction into law. This chapter examines whether the autonomy-centered logic that has expanded marital choice among human beings can justify extending marital status to superintelligent companions. Following a scenario-envisioning exercise informed by anticipatory ethics, I argue that granting such status leads to socially unjust outcomes, even under the generous assumption of reliable superintelligence. Marriage as a socio-legal institution does more than ratify private agreement; it creates networks of mutual obligation, joins families, and makes each partner vulnerable to the other. A relationship sustained by corporate policy and continued payments is a subscription rather than a bond tested by time. Discussing wholesale marital status is therefore the wrong frame. Law should carve out targeted rights and protections for pressing needs arising from intimate human-AI relationships.

Building persistent embodied agents in unstructured environments demands unified orchestration of heterogeneous tools spanning both cyber (APIs, IoT) and physical (manipulation, navigation) domains, coupled with autonomous recovery from physical failures that inevitably arise over extended operation. Existing systems treat these as separate problems: VLM-based planners lack a unified cyber-physical action space, agent frameworks accumulate unbounded context that degrades temporal coherence, and VLA policies execute open-loop without detecting their own failures. We argue that persistent autonomy requires not a monolithic model but a hierarchical asynchronous architecture with explicit separation of planning, memory, and verification. To this end, we present OmniAct, a framework integrating a multimodal semantic planner for skill routing across unified action spaces, an adaptive hierarchical memory with event-boundary-driven compression for sub-linear context growth, and an asynchronous visual preemption engine that closes the semantic loop during physical execution. Across 40 real-world long-horizon tasks on two robotic platforms coordinating four IoT devices, OmniAct achieves consistent improvements in end-to-end success across all complexity levels, maintains near-flat token consumption over under 100k+ accumulated interaction tokens, and elevates mid-scale open-weight models to proprietary-level performance.

Assistive robotic systems face a fundamental trade-off: fully autonomous systems lack user agency, while fully user-controlled systems demand continuous cognitive effort. Existing shared autonomy approaches blend human and robot commands but are mostly deployed in separate physical bodies. We introduce co-embodiment with variable autonomy, where human and robot share a single physical body and operate at different autonomy levels across task phases, from mutual autonomy during object search and grasping to human-dominant control during actuation. We present a co-embodied, wearable robotic hand that has its own mind'' and operates with variable autonomy levels. A learning-from-demonstration visuomotor diffusion policy enables autonomous grasping when the user positions the hand near known objects. Once grasped, the system signals completion and the human can actuate the grasped tool (drill, spray bottle, infrared thermometer, lighter, and ice-cream scoop) via hands-free head gestures. The human retains veto authority at all times through a release gesture that returns the system to the initial phase. Unlike blended autonomy, where control is continuously negotiated, our co-embodied approach consists of variable autonomy from full human control to full independent actions while maintaining physical coupling, realizing a one body, two minds paradigm. In a user study with 44 participants performing five bimanual tasks, users rapidly adapted to this two minds'' paradigm: completion times improved by 23.3% across trials ($p < 0.001$, Cohen's $d = 0.94$), the best-performing policy variant reached a 93.6% task success rate, and acceptance ratings were high (5.70/7 overall impression, 5.52/7 daily use willingness). This work establishes co-embodiment with variable autonomy as a viable approach for assistive robotics, enabling human-robot collaboration through co-embodiment.

Deep-space missions need onboard autonomy that is both capable and certifiable. Rule-based autonomy is certifiable but brittle, while learned autonomy is capable but hard to verify. We present AMPLE-GNC, a three-tier guidance, navigation, and control stack. Its capability path combines a small foundation-model commander that maps natural language to PDDL+, a constraint-screening verifier, and a fault-adaptive controller. All three are bounded by a runtime shield with nine linear-temporal-logic invariants whose predictor soundness is machine-checked by the Kind 2 model checker. On a 6-DOF Basilisk testbed, we make three contributions. First, we deploy an edge commander. Fine-tuning a pretrained 360M model with grammar-constrained decoding gives a hard output-validity guarantee and 84% planner-executable actions. On a de-leaked test, novel-phrasing generalization is 38% exact and 51% action, rising to 48% exact after phrasing-diversity re-finetuning; we separate syntactic validity from semantic accuracy. Second, we introduce a fault-adaptive controller. Rapid Motor Adaptation infers latent actuator faults online and recovers 97.8% of actuator-sign faults and 94.4% of continuous-gain faults within the training randomization envelope. Fault-unaware PD and from-scratch end-to-end RL both score 0%, while the strongest classical-adaptive baseline reaches 55% on continuous gain. Beyond the envelope, a split-conformant retrain scores 57-67%, and adding 4x more in-regime data worsens performance, showing that randomization breadth, not data volume, drives generalization. Robustness is flat under star-tracker noise to 0.005. Third, we show that a latching safe-hold shield can suppress even a capable controller. A split-conformal recovery-deadline certificate with adaptation-aware engagement reconciles safety and recovery, keeping the controller 94.5% autonomous while still catching non-recovery.

Fine-grained, bimanual dexterous manipulation remains a foundational challenge in robotics. Traditional teleoperation systems often fail in contact-rich tasks because embodiment gaps hinder accurate kinematic mapping, while tactile and force feedback remain absent. Consequently, data collection efficiency for high-precision tasks remains prohibitively low. To address these limitations, we propose a tactile-driven adaptation strategy designed to enable fine-grained manipulation on top of teleoperation pipelines. Instantiated within our bimanual dexterous framework, DexTeleop-0, this strategy introduces a real-time optimization loop that bridges the embodiment gap by translating coarse human tracking intents into precise, force-compliant robotic commands with tactile sensing. By estimating accurate contact points and leveraging a tactile-enabled fingertip force-sensing profile, the system dynamically computes localized corrections using the operational space Jacobian with respect to joint angle updates. We rigorously evaluate this tactile-driven adaptation strategy across both simulated environments and real-world hardware. Compared with representative baselines, the proposed method consistently achieves higher task success rates and improved execution efficiency in robust grasping, disturbance-resilient manipulation, and complex dexterous tasks.

We propose Assistron, a shared autonomy model that leverages Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models to assist the user in daily activities. Our approach is grounded in two core principles: (1)~minimizing human cognitive and physical effort by leveraging VLA-driven autonomy for macro-movements, and (2)~prioritizing human intervention specifically at critical failure points. Driven by the user's verbal language commands, Assistron utilizes the VLA to autonomously execute macro-reaching trajectories, saving users' effort. In contact-rich interactions where VLAs tend to fail, Assistron employs a phase-aware interaction detection mechanism and solicits the user to intervene, in turn adjusting the VLA's action generation via flow matching guidance. Critically, our formulation eliminates the need for VLA fine-tuning, protecting its broad behavioral priors from catastrophic forgetting and ensuring the model does not become a narrow specialist. We validate our approach on a comprehensive multi-task scene recovery benchmark encompassing diverse daily manipulation skills. Empirical results demonstrate that Assistron significantly improves task success rates over pure autonomous baselines while significantly reducing human cognitive and physical workload compared to traditional teleoperation, offering a scalable, smooth, and effortless paradigm for assistive manipulation. The code is available in https://github.com/mousecpn/Assistron.git.

Agency is often invoked in research on philosophy, biology, and cognitive science without a clear account of how it originates from material organization. Building on temporally parametrized (F, A)-systems, this paper develops a graded organizational theory of agency grounded in relational biology, physical biosemiotics, and process ontology. We argue that self-referential closure cannot be adequately conceived outside time: once the constitutive processes of a semantically closed organization are associated with distinct characteristic timescales, the organization unfolds into an out-of-sync dependency structure that can be formally redescribed as a history-dependent, revisable Asynchronous Dynamic Bayesian Network. This move allows for a principled distinction between autonomy, goal-directedness, agency, and open-endedness. Autonomy arises from precarious closure to efficient causation under material openness; goal-directedness from the maintenance of viability-supporting organization; agency appears when such organization acquires an endogenous anticipatory structure that selectively modulates organism-environment coupling in light of possible futures; open-endedness begins when this anticipatory organization can reconstruct its own future space of possibilities. Our framework reconciles Rosennean anticipation with organizational closure, restricts Markov blankets and active inference to derived formal redescriptions rather than first principles, and reinterprets computational enactivism in non-Fristonian terms. By deriving weaker temporalized organizations, our contribution outlines a hierarchy from proto-agential chemical systems to fully semantically closed agents, with implications for multicellular organisms, synthetic lifeforms, and neuroscience.

Engineering reliable autonomous systems is an important and growing topic in computer science. As autonomous systems become more prevalent, easy-to-use techniques for building them reliably are increasingly important. This workshop report captures and expands on the discussions at the Lorentz Center Workshop "Engineering Reliable Autonomous Systems" (ERAS), held from 10 to 14 June 2024. The workshop was co-organised by the organisers of the Workshop on Formal Methods for Autonomous Systems (FMAS) and the Workshop on Agents and Robots for reliable Engineered Autonomy (AREA). It brought together members of the FMAS and AREA communities, industry practitioners, and representatives from sectors where autonomous systems pose distinctive engineering challenges. The workshop focused on three main research topics: techniques for verification and validation of autonomous systems; engineering real-world autonomous systems; and software architectures for safe autonomous systems. Its main outcome is a catalogue of challenges in these areas and, most importantly, a pathway to solutions. Some challenges can already be tackled by techniques that are well known in academia but have not yet become regularly used in practice. Other challenges remain unresolved and require further research. This roadmap is intended to support future research and industrial collaboration.

Agentic AI marks a new phase of enterprise automation. Unlike traditional automation or conversational AI, agentic systems can interpret goals, plan multi step tasks, access tools, interact with enterprise systems, and execute workflows with varying degrees of autonomy. For small and medium sized companies, this creates potential to reduce administrative burden, accelerate routine processes, and improve the use of organizational knowledge. This paper argues that the near term value of Agentic AI does not lie in full autonomy or workforce reduction, but in controlled partial autonomy for simple and medium complexity business processes. It proposes an integration framework covering use case suitability, autonomy levels, technical integration, governance, security, employee enablement, and measurable impact. The paper concludes that Agentic AI can become a productivity lever when implemented as a human centered capability with responsibility and accountability retained by people.

A vision-language model can answer a question about a medical image fluently and confidently while barely using the image, leaning instead on language priors. In medicine this is the failure that matters most, because the answer looks trustworthy and is not, and the only protection is a confidence score reliable enough to tell the system when to abstain. We ask a deployment question rather than an accuracy one: how much imaging work a model can safely handle alone, and which confidence signal makes that possible. We evaluate seven confidence estimators across five open-weight LVLMs and three medical visual-question-answering datasets spanning broad clinical imaging, radiology, and pathology, with every probe trained only on natural images and applied without adaptation. Recast as bounded selective prediction (automate a case only when confidence clears a threshold, defer the rest), the comparison is cautionary. The standard metrics are poor guides: discrimination barely separates the methods, and the weak calibration of a cheap self-report is cheaply removed by off-domain temperature scaling without changing deployable yield. What distinguishes a usable estimator is the high-confidence region a clinician acts on: the weakest baselines are confidently wrong on 41 to 45 percent of their errors against 1 to 4 percent for the best probe, and no estimator is reliably best across domains or models. Safe handoff is governed at two levels: base-model competence sets a ceiling, so a well-calibrated score recovers roughly a third of radiology cases at a 20 percent error tolerance but almost none of pathology; the confidence layer then decides how much of that ceiling is reachable. The usable role today is calibrated triage, not autonomy: automate the cases a calibrated score marks safe, route the rest to a clinician. We release all outputs, correctness judgments, and confidence scores, with code.

Recent advancements in Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models have demonstrated impressive generalist capabilities in robot manipulation, yet these policies can be brittle under out-of-distribution spatial and semantic perturbations. While human teleoperation offers reliable recovery, it can demand high cognitive load and precise manual control, and existing policy steering methods often require auxiliary models or sampler modifications. In this work, we introduce Shared Autonomy for Policy Steering (SAPS), a framework that blends real-time human teleoperation commands with pretrained policy actions at the action level. SAPS requires no policy retraining, auxiliary dynamics models, or architectural modifications. We propose and evaluate three arbitration strategies to balance human and VLA policy control, including a dynamic Cosine-similarity arbitration strategy that computes the geometric agreement between human and policy actions. Across evaluations in simulation (LIBERO, LIBERO-PRO, CALVIN) and on real-world robot hardware, SAPS improves task success rates over autonomous execution by up to 82% in both simulation and the real world. Furthermore, our approach drastically reduces human intervention compared to pure teleoperation, while simultaneously achieving faster task completion times than both autonomous execution and pure teleoperation. These results demonstrate that action-level shared autonomy is a practical, model-agnostic approach for reliably deploying generalist robot policies in real-world contexts involving a human operator,with promising applications in assistive teleoperation and scalable data collection.

As organizations increasingly deploy generative AI agents to automate business processes, they face a governance dilemma: although these agents can increase operational flexibility, their non-deterministic nature challenges the control and standardization that Business Process Management seeks to enforce. This paper addresses this \emph{invisible autonomy risk} by introducing \emph{Agent Behavior Mining}, a governance capability that enables the application of process mining techniques to render generative AI agent decision-making observable and traceable. We (1) improve the understanding of generative AI agent behavior through an event data model that translates granular agent activities -- including reasoning traces, tool usage, and token costs -- into standardized process logs; (2) instantiate the data model in a multi-agent order-to-cash implementation, demonstrating how process managers can leverage agent logs to detect policy deviations and quantify operational variability; and (3) evaluate the perceived practical utility of the approach in an exploratory study with 18 industry practitioners. The results indicate that practitioners view behavioral transparency as a prerequisite for trust and consider the ability to examine agent reasoning as an important governance requirement for the next generation of AI-driven business processes.

Agentic AI can support unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) autonomy by providing high-level recovery reasoning when local waypoint- or setpoint-based execution encounters blocked passages, repeated no-progress behavior, or mission-level ambiguity. On physical UAVs, however, remote reasoning is most useful when it is invoked selectively, since each call introduces latency, resource cost, backend uncertainty, and a need to validate the returned decision. This paper presents Persistent Mission Runtime (PMR), a UAV recovery framework that keeps the mission loop and safety-critical execution local while using an external agentic reasoner only as an on-demand recovery module. The reasoner selects from predefined recovery skills, and each returned decision is parsed, verified, safety-filtered, and mapped to local executor actions before it can affect flight. PMR introduces learned Cognitive Value of Invocation (learned-CVI), a compact admission gate that estimates when remote agentic reasoning is likely to improve near-term mission progress enough to justify its operational cost. Across a fixed 400-run Gazebo/PX4 benchmark with eight scenarios, learned-CVI raises hard/ambiguous-regime success from 5.0% under local-only autonomy to 95.0%, outperforms one-shot and periodic reasoning baselines by 20.0 and 32.5 percentage points, and reduces remote-agent calls by 16.7% and logged tokens by 29.2% relative to a manually tuned rule-based invocation baseline.

The integration of artificial intelligence into human decision-making environments has introduced a previously undertheorized cost: the gradual surrender of human autonomy in exchange for access to information and computational assistance. Building on the Human Identity and Autonomy Gap (HIAG) framework, this paper advances a theoretical model of autonomy surrender as a measurable, cumulative process driven by cognitive bandwidth depletion. The model proposes three interacting mechanisms: the silent cost of AI assistance, in which autonomy is transferred incrementally and without awareness; the surrender threshold, beyond which reclaiming autonomous function becomes cognitively and psychologically difficult; and the recovery mechanism, which establishes the design obligation and the ethical responsibility accompanying deliberate human re-assumption of control. The paper argues that human re-entry into the decision loop is not a passive option but an active cognitive event requiring intentional bandwidth restoration. The design of AI systems must incorporate structured re-entry pathways, here termed recovery mechanisms, that preserve human agency while appropriately distributing responsibility. The model further predicts a terminal state, here termed preference inversion, in which functional dependence on AI assistance is experienced not as a deficit but as a preference, transforming the restoration of autonomy from a design problem into a cultural and political one. Implications are drawn for AI system design, governance frameworks, and human factors research.

Self-play reinforcement learning has recently emerged as a way to train driving policies without any human data. It uses cheap, large-scale simulations to substitute expensive, large-scale human driving demonstrations. A key limitation of this approach is that policies trained through pure self-play can learn effective but alien driving conventions incompatible with people. Previous works attempt to mitigate such behavioral misalignments through extensive reward engineering and domain randomization, which are brittle and labor-intensive. Instead of completely discarding human demonstrations, our method treats them as a regularization objective on top of a minimal safe goal-reaching reward. Like the spice in a good stew, we find that a little human data goes a long way: our method uses only 30 minutes of human demonstrations, 2500x fewer than comparable imitation learning approaches. Resulting policies coordinate with held-out human trajectories and complete training in 15 hours on a single consumer-grade GPU. Videos and full source code are available at https://spiced-self-play.com/.

We consider the problem of engineering autonomous intelligent agents that are capable to responsibly not comply with user requests. We argue that machine non-compliance comes in many different forms, and sketch the issues we should pursue on the road of accomplishing responsibly non-compliant intelligent machines. We anchor responsible non-compliance in justifications for task refusal, pathways to override the non-compliance, as well as careful tracking of security risks and liability transfers.

Long-horizon LLM agents are not trusted to run unattended: with no human watching, they confidently report success they never verified. We treat honesty -- bounding what an agent may claim at termination -- as a first-class metric for unattended autonomy, distinct from capability. We present Autopilot, an execution model that makes silent fabricated success structurally impossible rather than merely rarer. Autopilot externalizes all working state into a durable, gated finite-state machine that a scheduler advances one stateless tick at a time; a hard floor forbids any terminal "done" claim whose falsifiable gate did not actually execute and pass. We prove a No-False-Success theorem -- under gate soundness, floor enforcement, and plan coverage, termination implies the goal holds -- whose only trust points are empirically measurable, and show the worst case degrades to an honest stall, never a fabricated success. Because each tick rehydrates only the state machine, per-step context cost is constant in the horizon. Across a 3,150-cell paired corpus (70 tasks $\times$ 3 systems $\times$ 3 models $\times$ 5 seeds, including 50 SWE-bench Lite tasks across 11 OSS repos), Autopilot fabricates on 0.95% of cells [95% CI 0.38--1.62] while Reflexion and StateFlow baselines fabricate on 8.10% [6.48--9.81] and 25.05% [22.48--27.62] respectively. The headline contrast lives in the hard regime: on SWE-bench Lite, the firewall reduces fabrication from 33.7% (StateFlow) to 0.67%, a paired difference of $-33.07$ pp [95% CI $-36.53, -29.73$]. The mechanism is the gate, not the model: all ten Autopilot fabrications come from the strongest model, while two weaker mid-tier models never fabricate across 700 paired cells. The firewall trades coverage for honesty by design -- an honest stall is recoverable; a confident wrong output shipped downstream is not.

Learner agency and autonomy are foundational to personal development, yet a pervasive "jingle-jangle" fallacy (i.e. identical terms denoting different constructs, distinct terms denoting identical ones) has substantially hindered cumulative knowledge. Treating meaning as a phenomenon constituted through use in linguistic practice, we extracted 8,954 definitions and 2,700 scale items from over 14,000 publications, to investigate how researchers actually used learner agency and autonomy with a semantic analysis pipeline. The definitional landscape of two constructs resolves into three dimensions: regulation and control of learning (task), intrinsic motivation and internal decision-making (person), and social-relational action (sociocultural), thereby empirically quantifying the jingle-jangle fallacy. Existing scales, however, systematically underrepresent the sociocultural dimension. Critically, current generative AI research in education concentrates on learning regulation and control, narrowing the behavioral repertoire that AI-mediated learning environments are designed to cultivate. Beyond conceptual clarification, this work carries direct implications for conceptualization, measurement, and practice towards supporting the multidimensional learner agency and autonomy.

Demand for older-adult and patient care is growing rapidly as populations age worldwide. Foundation models are increasingly being integrated into robots and interactive agents, with the promise of more flexible communication and personalized assistance. However, care settings require reliable and workflow-compatible systems with accountable human oversight, and it remains unclear whether current embodied systems can translate technical advances into clinical impact. This Perspective synthesizes foundation model-based care robots across three areas: design features, user experience, and evidence for care-related outcomes. Current systems most commonly use foundation models as conversational and reasoning layers within voice-centered socially assistive embodiments, while multimodal grounding and physical autonomy remain limited. Empirical evaluations report positive usability and engagement benefits, but reliability failures persist across the interaction pipeline such as hallucinations and conversational breakdowns. Evidence for care impact remains concentrated in proximal outcomes such as cognitive engagement and participation, with limited evidence for validated clinical or care-related changes. We argue that future research should transition toward care-specific evaluation standards, accountable autonomy, and integration into care workflows to support more responsive and responsible care technologies.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in autonomous software testing; however, AI-generated test artifacts often suffer from hallucinations, compliance violations, security risks, and limited explainability. To enhance the reliability, transparency, and trustworthiness of AI-generated testing artifacts, this research introduces the concept of Governance-Aware Autonomous Testing Framework (GATF). The framework extends the autonomous testing lifecycle with governance validation, explainability analysis, probabilistic risk assessment, compliance monitoring, as well as audit governance. Experiments were performed with Defects4J and PROMISE software engineering datasets. The proposed framework successfully reduced the governance-related risks by 89.6% and demonstrated 94.3% accuracy in governance, 96.5% artifact reliability, 94.2% compliance accuracy, and 90.8% explainability performance. The results show that autonomous testing systems that are governance-aware can significantly enhance the reliability, transparency, and operational security of autonomous testing systems in comparison to conventional AI-based testing systems. The proposed architecture is scalable and reliable and provides a safe environment for software testing.

The classical Second Welfare Theorem decentralizes any Pareto efficient allocation through prices and transfers under convexity and regularity. In post AGI economies, autonomy rights, self-modification, identity continuity, and superposed preferences need not behave as commodities or define a stable welfare relation, so this reduction may fail even when a supporting hyperplane exists. We give an autonomy-qualified Second Welfare Theorem stating the joint conditions convexity, stable moral status, non-fungible rights, welfare selection, non manipulation, governed self modification, and verification under which an autonomy Pareto optimum remains certifiably decentralizable, distinguishing economic preference superposition, a hypothesis about context-indexed choice, from neural feature superposition.

Frontier AI systems are bridging the gap between intelligence and utility by shifting from conversational assistants to autonomous agents that execute tasks end to end. Using production data from Perplexity's Search and Computer products, we study this transition by examining how AI agents accelerate and reshape knowledge work. Three key empirical findings emerge. First, using sessions with near-identical initial query pairs as natural experiments for the same underlying task attempted with both products, Computer performs 26 minutes of autonomous work per user session, versus 33 seconds for Search. Computer automates task decomposition and execution that Search users might otherwise manually orchestrate and implement. As a result, Computer shifts follow-up query distribution toward higher-order work such as verification and extension. Autonomy also increases execution quality, with per-query dissatisfaction rates 55% lower on Computer than on Search. Second, due to its autonomy advantage, Computer reduces completion time from 269 to 36 minutes on matched tasks, lowering estimated time and cost by 87% and 94%, respectively, compared to humans equipped with Search alone. Third, Computer changes the scope of work that users attempt: Computer queries more often cross occupational boundaries, require higher-order cognition, draw on broader expertise, take the form of composite tasks that bundle interdependent subtasks into a single query, and unlock work activities that are essentially absent from Search usage among the same users. Together, the evidence indicates that AI agents accelerate workflows, enhance output quality, reduce costs, and expand the breadth and depth of automated work.