arXiv:2607. 18548v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic artificial intelligence systems, capable of autonomous perception, planning, tool use, and multi-step action, are increasingly proposed for critical engineering domains where decisions carry physical, operational, or economic consequences.
arXiv:2607. 12619v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The rapid emergence of LLM-powered autonomous and semi-autonomous agents is reshaping software systems from static, request-response components into goal-directed, adaptive, and tool-using computational actors.
arXiv:2607. 26121v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Embodied intelligence integrates learned perception and decision making with real-time computation, control, and physical interaction.
The paper proposes AI Deployment Accountability Engineering (ADAE), a new subdiscipline focused on establishing measurable, continuous, and actionable accountability for AI systems once they are deployed. ADAE treats accountability as a deployment-layer property, aiming to ensure systems remain within acceptable risk limits, identify failure contexts, attribute failures across technical and human components, and translate technical failures into downstream consequences. The authors outline a research agenda built around four pillars—structured discovery of context-dependent failure modes, privacy-preserving accountability measurement, system-level risk analysis for agentic AI, and translation of technical failures into operational and institutional risks—to support timely intervention in safety-critical socio-technical environments.
arXiv:2607. 29405v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic AI systems act through multi-step trajectories that combine planning, tool use, memory, interaction, and adaptation.
arXiv:2607. 18243v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic AI is crossing trust boundaries faster than current risk models can represent.
arXiv:2609.13731v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The transition from passive foundation models to autonomous, goal-directed agentic AI systems has introduced unprecedented capabilities by coupling rec...
arXiv:2505. 23397v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: This article presents a structured framework for Human-AI collaboration in Security Operations Centers (SOCs), integrating AI autonomy, trust calibration, and Human-in-the-loop decision making.
The paper discusses the trustworthiness of agentic AI systems built on large language models, highlighting new security and operational risks such as indirect prompt injection, memory contamination, and cross‑session data leakage. It categorizes failure modes, reviews mitigation strategies—including instruction hierarchies, context isolation, and constrained tool use—and introduces the Trustworthy Agent Development Lifecycle (TADL), a six‑phase framework for specification, design, training, evaluation, deployment, and monitoring. The authors note that TADL has not yet been empirically validated but offers a structured foundation for developing more secure and accountable agentic systems, and they call for improved benchmarks and future research priorities.
The paper introduces TRACE, a Transparent Reasoning Architecture for Credible Execution, which provides an explainable AI-based decision framework for autonomous robots. TRACE structures decision-making into four auditable layers—Semantic Perception, Belief Reasoning, Action Synthesis, and Execution Verification—to ensure every action can be traced back to sensor evidence through documented causal chains. Experimental results on warehouse robot navigation show high evidence traceability (98.6%), temporal continuity (99.0%), and decision reconstructability (98.1%) across 500 simulated decision cycles.
arXiv:2608. 16402v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model-based agentic frameworks primarily optimize capability: whether an agent can reason, retrieve information, call tools, delegate work, and complete a goal.
The paper proposes rethinking bias in AI as a diagnostic tool rather than merely a flaw to be minimized. It introduces a multidimensional framework that examines bias across origin, lifecycle emergence, technical causes, and validation methods, covering 30 bias types, 16 verification methods, and 20 countermeasures for both traditional and generative AI. The authors present a hierarchical evidence framework distinguishing internal and external validity, and advocate for Ethics by Design principles to embed bias verification throughout the AI development lifecycle.
arXiv:2607. 23365v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Artificial intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly deployed in high-stakes domains such as healthcare, autonomous driving, finance, and education.