arXiv AI
The paper introduces two zero‑trust frameworks for cloud data engineering and analytical processing. The first, Zero‑Trust Agentic Data Engineering, automatically generates, deploys, and verifies complete data‑engineering solutions from natural‑language tasks, requiring evidence from repositories, deployments, runtimes, and policies. The second, Zero‑Trust Agentic OLAP, combines governed data preparation with verified online analytical processing, allowing production promotion only after rigorous validation and evidence‑bound approval, and ensuring analytical outputs are released only after same‑snapshot execution, exact result equivalence, deterministic grounding, and reflection. Both frameworks rely on three core abstractions—graph engineering for evidence‑gated workflow structure, loop engineering for bounded recovery, and agent‑harness engineering for zero‑trust execution—and are evaluated under nominal execution, controlled failures, bounded recovery, and policy‑constrained conditions to measure verified completion, recovery, authorization enforcement, production promotion, and verified OLAP execution.
The paper introduces Agentic Cloud Workflow Engineering, a framework that converts natural‑language agentic cloud‑engineering tasks into validated code repositories and verified cloud deployments. It separates graph engineering for long‑horizon workflow progression, loop engineering for bounded diagnosis and recovery, and agent harness engineering for zero‑trust execution. Experiments on Google Cloud show that executions either produce a verified deployment or an auditable terminal failure within bounded recovery limits.
By Sagar Srinivas Sakhinana, Venkataramana Runkana
The paper introduces a multi‑agent framework that transforms natural‑language MLOps tasks into verified repositories and operational cloud deployments. It uses a stateful Graph Orchestrator to coordinate agents for repository generation, review, execution, verification, release, and monitoring, ensuring lifecycle transitions only occur when supported by verifiable evidence. The framework, implemented on Google Cloud Platform, demonstrates prevention of unsupported transitions and drives each run toward a verified deployment or an auditable failure.
By Sagar Srinivas Sakhinana, Venkataramana Runkana
arXiv:2606. 04990v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-based agents increasingly solve complex tasks by interacting with external tools, retrieval systems, memory modules, environments, and other agents.
By Yiqi Wang, Jiaqi Zhang, Taotao Cai, Zirui Liu, Qingqiang Sun, Zequn Sun, Zhangkai Wu, Mingkai Zhang, Yanming Zhu
arXiv:2608. 14590v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents increasingly perform irreversible real-world actions, including database updates, API calls, file operations, and autonomous use of tools.
By Pierre Dantas, Lucas Cordeiro, Ehsan Nowroozi, Tihanyi Norbert
Agents increasingly generate SQL, orchestrate pipelines, and automate data analysis on behalf of users. While recent work improves query correctness, correctness is not safety.
arXiv:2608. 03609v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic systems driven by large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world workflows where they act on persistent operational data.
By Alejandro J. Mercado, Alessio Lomuscio
arXiv:2606. 04990v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM)-based agents are evolving from passive text generators into autonomous systems capable of planning, tool use, retrieval, memory access, environmental interaction, and multi-agent collaboration.
By Yiqi Wang, Jiaqi Zhang, Taotao Cai, Zirui Liu, Qingqiang Sun, Zequn Sun, Zhangkai Wu, Manqing Dong, Mingkai Zhang, Xuefei Yin, Yanming Zhu
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.
By Fayeq Jeelani Syed, Rehan Ahmad, Ali Al Bataineh, Aakriti Adhikari
arXiv:2606. 05679v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agents increasingly generate SQL, orchestrate pipelines, and automate data analysis on behalf of users.
By Charlie Summers, Eugene Wu
arXiv:2607. 00035v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLMs and agents can generate web scrapers from natural-language requirements, but direct generation remains unreliable because of dependency errors, broken selectors, schema mismatches, and heterogeneous page structures.
By Bo Chen
Answer accuracy is an insufficient reliability signal for LLM data agents. In structured-data tasks, a benchmark-correct answer can be produced by an invalid trace. This paper introduces Trace Integri...
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.
By Bhaskar Tripathi, Anurag Kumar, Ramendra Kumar, Bhavesh Gadhe