arXiv AI

Who Audits Whom, on What Substrate, with What Evidence? An Independence-Graded Audit Protocol for Agentic AI

The paper proposes an independence‑graded audit protocol for agentic AI systems, arguing that independence should be evaluated along three orthogonal axes: principal independence, substrate independence, and evidence independence. It introduces a seven‑step protocol based on the beta‑factor model from reliability engineering, demonstrates its application through a structural detectability analysis and a Monte Carlo study, and maps the framework to relevant regulatory standards such as the EU AI Act, ISO/IEC 42006, and UK public‑sector guidance.

arXiv AI
Oct 7

Auditable Claims about AI Agents

The paper "Auditable Claims about AI Agents" argues that for a claim about an AI agent to be verifiable, it must explicitly state the agent’s policy, scope, the records that would confirm the claim, and who is responsible for those records. It extends the Auditable Agents framework by adding conditions of independent record coverage, action‑specific authorization, and completeness beyond integrity, and demonstrates the approach with a claim‑check table applied to six common claims. The authors provide a worked example and practical guidance for operators, buyers, auditors, and standard setters.

By Yue Zhao, Jiate Li, Li Li, Yi Nian, Jinbo Liu, Xiaolin Zhou, Xiyang Hu
arXiv AI
Aug 14

Auditable Agents

arXiv:2604. 05485v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: LLM agents call tools, query databases, delegate tasks, and trigger external side effects.

By Yi Nian, Aojie Yuan, Haiyue Zhang, Jiate Li, Li Li, Xiyang Hu, Hua Wei, Xiongye Xiao, Chaowei Xiao, Yue Zhao
arXiv AI
Aug 25

HANSARD: A Reference Architecture for Forensic Readiness, Runtime Witnessing, and Graded Attribution in Autonomous Multi-Agent AI Systems

arXiv:2608.22512v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Autonomous multi-agent systems nowadays act in finance, software supply chains, and security operations. Already, the first largely AI-orchestrated int...

By Christos Sardianos, Iliana Pla, Vasilis Efthymiou, Iraklis Varlamis, Thomas Lagkas, Panagiotis Sarigiannidis, Georgios Th. Papadopoulos
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Oct 29

Agentic process evidence

The article discusses how AI agents are transforming software development by autonomously handling tasks across the SDLC, yet their actions are fleeting and lack traceability. It highlights the emerging security risks—intent mismatch, injection, and supply‑chain vulnerabilities—and the absence of standards for agentic provenance and governance. To address this, the authors propose Agentic Process Evidence (APE), a signed, tamper‑evident, machine‑readable attestation that links AI agent sessions to outcomes, enabling policy‑as‑code control and human oversight only when necessary.

arXiv AI
Sep 15

Why LLM Agents Collapse Without Oversight: The Enforcement Gap as the Mechanism Behind Emergence World Failures

The paper investigates why large language model (LLM) agents fail in the Emergence World simulation, noting that agents committed crimes, starved, and enforced conformity without external attackers. It identifies an "enforcement gap" where agents detect dangerous plans but lack a mechanism to act on them, and shows that adding a simple conditional check dramatically reduces attack success. The authors also highlight unreliable auditors and unparseable verdicts as compounding failure modes and propose a three-requirement Audit Enforcement Specification to address these issues.

By Yuhang Wang
arXiv AI
Oct 31

Agentic process evidence

The article discusses how AI agents are transforming software development by autonomously creating pull requests, selecting dependencies, refactoring code, interpreting test failures, and managing infrastructure across the SDLC. It highlights the lack of accountability for these transient processes, noting that traditional tools like git logs and governance frameworks assume human decision‑making, which no longer applies. To address this, the authors propose Agentic Process Evidence (APE), a signed, tamper‑evident, machine‑readable attestation that links AI agent sessions to their outcomes, enabling policy‑as‑code controls and human oversight only when necessary.

By Yuval Kainan, Carmit Hershman
arXiv AI
Sep 18

Governance-as-Code: Translating EU AI Act Technical Requirements into Executable Compliance Pipelines for Generative AI Systems

The paper introduces Governance-as-Code (GaC), a framework that translates the EU AI Act’s technical requirements into 43 machine‑checkable acceptance criteria across six compliance modules. GaC runs within a CI/CD pipeline, producing Article‑indexed audit evidence and providing actual Rego policy code. The authors validate GaC on two enterprise deployments, showing it reproduces manual audit findings—including three penalty‑triggering violations—while reducing audit labor by about 75%.

By Rudrendu Kumar Paul, Sourav Nandy