The paper discusses how large language model (LLM) agents can perform epistemic actions—actions that improve the evidence base before making a decision. It identifies three modes of such actions: acquiring missing evidence, transforming available evidence, and probing the system to generate revealing responses. The authors introduce the concept of epistemic scaffolding, referring to interfaces, tools, and environments that enable and audit these actions, arguing that agent design must explicitly address how decision-ready evidence is produced.
arXiv:2602. 15259v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Generative AI agents equate understanding with resolving explicit queries, an assumption that confines interaction to what users can articulate.
The paper introduces MIRAGE, a benchmark of 750 multi‑step decision tasks designed to test autonomous web agents’ investigative abilities across Wikipedia Forensics, Shopping Admin adjudication, and Reddit Moderation. Each task contains a misleading visible context and a hidden context that holds decisive evidence, allowing performance to be broken down into Investigation, Reasoning, and Decision Accuracy, with an added Investigative Hallucination Rate. Evaluation of eight LLM agents reveals three consistent patterns: agents often reach relevant pages but fail to extract decisive evidence, procedural hints improve investigation but not decision accuracy on Wikipedia tasks, and 12.6% of trajectories include fabricated facts.
The paper proposes a four‑dimensional formal framework—Semantic Expressivity, Agentic Discoverability, Task‑Relative Grounding, and Epistemic Trust Scope—to extend current KG metadata standards (VoID and DCAT). It introduces the Agentic Affordance Profile (AAP), a semantic layer that enables agents to select, compose, and diagnose failures in knowledge graphs at planning time. A scholarly‑search example illustrates the framework and outlines a five‑point research agenda for scaling AAP‑based affordance matching.
arXiv:2607. 03228v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-based agents offer new opportunities for automating business process execution beyond the limits of rule-based systems.
arXiv:2606. 22737v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Before letting an agent operate over real context, can you prove it used the right evidence?
Organizational decisions are co-created while evidence, constraints, and human priorities continue to evolve. In conventional transcript-based multi-agent systems, humans typically provide an initial problem, agents deliberate internally, and the system returns a final response.
arXiv:2607. 12267v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Language agents that interleave reasoning and tool use degrade sharply as reasoning chains lengthen, even when each individual step is easy.
arXiv:2607. 09195v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly expected to play a central role in AI-driven scientific discovery.
arXiv:2606.11897v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Scientific discovery workflows rely heavily on lab notes, where researchers record observations, interpret uncertain results, and plan follow-up ex...
Scientific discovery workflows usually contain and rely heavily on lab notes, where researchers record observations, interpret uncertain results, and plan follow-up experiments. Such informative lab notes preserve evolving scientific reasoning and author uncertainty, rather than polished final results exhibited in publications, providing a valuable opportunity for AI to engage in scientific exploration at a more comprehensive and deeper level.
The paper introduces a new evaluation for large language model agents called epistemic humility (EH), which measures an agent’s ability to recognize, act on, and communicate uncertainty when evidence conflicts with prior beliefs. EH is operationalized through three trajectory-level behaviors—Identify, Solve, and Escalate (ISE)—and tested in both controlled and naturally occurring knowledge conflict scenarios. Results show that higher task accuracy does not guarantee greater epistemic humility, and that model-level interventions can improve EH but often reduce accuracy, indicating that humility depends on the interplay between the backbone model, agent harness, and environment.
arXiv:2609.01526v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific agents must learn not only how to reason, but also what to believe. However, existing LLM agents typically express scientific hypotheses in...