The paper introduces Grounded Normative Rule Generation (GNRS) and a new framework called GNRS-Search that uses Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling to optimize a discrete And-Or Graph for rule synthesis. By separating operational feasibility from prose generation, the method localizes rule failures before final text creation. Evaluations on GNRS-Bench and RealCharter-Bench show significant improvements in rubric quality and executable metrics, demonstrating that the gains come from robust operational logic rather than stylistic tuning.
arXiv:2606. 07805v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The rapid evolution of Large Language Models (LLMs) from passive assistants to autonomous, execution-capable agents has introduced critical operational risks.
The paper introduces Tasks over Application Manuals (TAM), a benchmark designed to test long‑horizon procedural reasoning in large language models. TAM uses real‑world tasks from ICD‑10‑CM clinical coding and U.S. federal sentencing, requiring models to follow extensive, rule‑based manuals and perform interdependent steps to produce exact answers. Experiments with GPT‑5 and various prompting strategies show very low exact‑match accuracy—1% for coding and 15.5% for sentencing—highlighting a gap between current benchmarks and the ability to reliably follow complex procedures.
arXiv:2608. 16852v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Regulatory compliance monitoring in deployed language models is increasingly implemented as a legal and audit control, checking model outputs against written rules spanning data protection, healthcare, financial regulation, and platform policy.
arXiv:2607. 03656v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models are increasingly used to turn natural-language requirements into code.
arXiv:2606. 08932v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Rule-following agents tasked with executing policies and regulations often fail via Silent Scope Omission (SSO): a model applies a general rule but silently drops nested exceptions or counter-exceptions, producing outputs that appear compliant yet break on important edge cases.
arXiv:2606. 02965v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Benchmarks for autonomous agents measure whether agents complete tasks, yet this framing is systematically blind to whether an agent should have proceeded at all.
The paper argues that large language model agents should not be the sole authority on whether they have satisfied a task. It identifies two gaps—understanding–execution and state–authority—where agents may claim completion without actually meeting the specification. The authors propose SpecHarness, a framework that separates agent proposals from authoritative state by requiring evidence from qualified providers to confirm compliance, and demonstrate its effectiveness on guideline‑following and artifact‑generation tasks.
arXiv:2606. 02965v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As large language models gain tool access and are deployed as autonomous agents capable of editing records, executing transactions, and modifying infrastructure, we still evaluate them based on the sole metric of task completion.
arXiv:2608. 15591v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Model (LLM) agents deployed in production environments face a fundamental tension: the agent's behavior is frozen at deployment time, while the business rules and edge cases it must handle continue to evolve.
arXiv:2606. 29887v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In real-world applications, guardrails are often expected to identify unsafe user-model interactions according to application-specific safety policies, rather than relying on predefined risk taxonomies.
The paper presents a retrieval‑augmented generation pipeline for answering regulatory compliance questions in finance. It builds a three‑stage retriever on LegalBERT and a compact 2B–12B generator served with 4‑bit quantization, achieving a Recall@10 of 0.774 on the ObliQA benchmark and improving answer quality via RAFT‑LoRA fine‑tuning. However, the adapted models fail to transfer to Australian case‑law questions, and a closed‑book model performs almost as well while lacking verifiable grounding.
arXiv:2607. 02599v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool-using LLM agents are usually evaluated by final-answer correctness or LLM judges.