The paper introduces a framework for evaluating how large language model agents revise their success criteria after failures, defining five non‑compensatory conditions that must be met for a criterion revision to be considered valid. Using the CMB‑0.1 protocol, the authors test twelve cross‑domain scenarios across four system configurations, finding that no model trial satisfies all five conditions and highlighting specific failure modes such as zero‑state reconstruction and inadequate intervention sensitivity. They propose a more stringent trace‑anchored CMB‑0.4 protocol to better isolate and measure criterion revision in future studies.
By Guodong Xu
The paper introduces Revision‑Aware Independent Agent Graphs (RIAG) to address dynamic task routing, where an event stream continually revises task bindings and a system must select the correct document version at query time. By repurposing six benchmarks into over 31,000 dynamic episodes, the authors demonstrate that RIAG balances recomputation and reuse, achieving 54.24 % joint routing‑and‑answer accuracy with only 0.62 calls per query—substantially better than the strongest baseline. The study highlights the trade‑off between stale conclusions and wasted work in dynamic reasoning settings.
By Yan Luo, Selim-Antoine Lali, Jeremy Moebel, Iliass Khoutaibi, Ahmadou Aidara, Mengyu Wang
arXiv:2607. 00269v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLMs, solvers, and agent teams increasingly generate workflow actions, repairs, and plans, but a generated action may be syntactically valid yet stale, infeasible, conflicting, or destructive of the evidence that triggered a repair.
By Edward Y. Chang, Longling Geng, Emily J. Chang
The paper introduces “Revise”, a runtime system that performs validity-guided, fine-grained recovery for online revisions in structured agent workflows. When a revision arrives, Revise intersects the change with recorded data and control dependencies, propagates the impact through the partially executed DAG, stops invalid work, preserves unaffected progress, and recomputes only the affected region. Experiments on real coding‑agent traces and LangGraph/LLMCompiler applications show that Revise matches a latest‑version oracle, reduces model calls by up to 56%, and improves service‑level objective goodput under load.
By Ruoling Qi, Xuaner Wu, Penghang Liu, Jian Chen, Yirui Liu
The paper introduces PlanFence, a dependency-scoped action‑validation protocol for distributed large language model (LLM) agent teams. PlanFence requires plans to cite the exact public records they rely on, and executors validate only those records that could affect the pending action, replanning or blocking if validation is incomplete. In 30 controlled live workflows, a freshness‑only executor always acted on obsolete plans, whereas PlanFence completed all tasks without invalid actions, demonstrating controlled safety and system‑cost benefits.
By Evan Chen, Shiqiang Wang, Christopher G. Brinton
arXiv:2607. 23929v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM agents increasingly coordinate through persistent shared memory: one agent's write becomes another agent's premise, and eventually a tool call with real side effects.
By Xiaoyang Li, Yiqi Wang, Haohui Lu, Zhi Chen, Mo Li, Pingan Song, Taotao Cai
arXiv:2607. 05483v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic workflows often operate over shared, structured state.
By Zhaoyu Bai, Jiaqi Cai
The paper proposes invalidation contracts to manage cached recovery suggestions in LLM agents, attaching version stamps and cacheability hints to each suggestion so stale entries can be evicted without trial and error. The protocol separates realized savings into validity (protocol‑dependent) and compliance (planner‑dependent), showing that row‑level invalidation can significantly improve first‑try compliance and recover a substantial portion of token costs across multiple models, while table‑level invalidation can be detrimental. The study evaluates the approach across seven models, three serving paths, two domains, and about 9,400 episodes, demonstrating deterministic validity and high eviction precision.
By Michael Wu, Arquimedes Canedo
arXiv:2609.25054v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: For a long-horizon LLM agent, the memory question is not what was once recorded but what \emph{currently holds}. Most designs answer it only indirectly...
By Bowen Qin, Yao Lu
arXiv:2606. 30306v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Always-on agents are systems whose future behavior depends on durable state accumulated across earlier interactions.
By Tianyu Ding, Aditya Nannapaneni, Bingfan Liu, Ling Zhang
Large language model agents coordinate tasks via multi‑role, multi‑stage workflows that transform upstream state into intermediate artifacts such as summaries and plans. The study shows that when these artifacts are transformed—through compression, plan assimilation, or other handoff methods—the strict action‑binding constraints on upstream state can be weakened, turning mandatory requirements into optional information. In 1,296 synthetic episodes, direct handoff preserved all safety blockers, whereas transformed handoffs frequently deactivated or forbidden actions, but restoring full state fields or applying downstream verification can recover preservation.
By Yiheng Sun, Huifei Wang, Yancheng Zhu, Zhenyu Li, Zebin Zhao, Yifan Yuan
Always-on agents are systems whose future behavior depends on durable state accumulated across earlier interactions. We treat them as persistent-state systems: the operative system includes retrievable memories, but also task ledgers, permissions, credentials, commitments, provenance and audit records, shared state, trigger conditions, and externally committed effects linked to those records.