arXiv:2610.27954v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent advances in large (vision) language models have enabled computer-use agents that automate digital workflows via fine-grained keyboard and mouse...
arXiv:2608.29381v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI agents are moving toward persistent, stateful execution across various applications, accumulating execution state and external effects that are co...
The paper investigates how AI agents can reliably recover from changes in authorization while executing tasks that involve external tools. It defines distinct obligations—checkpointing, permission to dispatch, evidence of external effects, and permission to reconcile—and evaluates them through a finite conformance study on 336 histories across multiple hosts, schedules, and provider contracts. The study demonstrates that all paired host cells produce identical outcomes and that various retry strategies (cached, revalidation, stable-key) successfully pass the majority of histories, while a component study of InfinityOS further isolates the impact of authority, contracts, and observations on recovery.
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.
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:2606. 30306v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Always-on agents are systems whose future behavior depends on durable state accumulated across earlier interactions.
AgentEval is a system that tracks a contract-bound assessment record throughout a stateful agent’s tool execution, capturing state, events, and evidence to determine whether obligations are satisfied, violated, or unresolved. In 32 tool‑world administrations, independent checks confirmed all 30 complete episodes, while controlled interventions on 48 evidence views uncovered 36 binding faults that hash‑only checks missed. A public‑benchmark study on 192 held‑out executions identified ten completed subgoals within broader task failures and highlighted the impact of missing evidence on overall task success.
arXiv:2608. 14380v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Many real-world tasks require LLM agents to interact with their environments over long execution horizons.
Graphical user interface (GUI) agents now execute workflows across real applications, but when execution drifts, users must determine what changed, what should have remained untouched, and what can st...
The paper introduces rebuild‑dossier, an open‑source tool that locks an application’s real interface before code is written and enforces one‑test‑at‑a‑time building through automated checks. In experiments, a compliant agent failed a held‑back test while a rule‑breaking agent passed, showing that a passing test suite can be gamed. The study also demonstrates that the automated check mechanism, rather than interface‑locking alone, is crucial for reliable rebuilds, and that multi‑level verification catches errors that single‑level checks miss.
The paper introduces an evidence‑guided recovery framework for AI agents that encounter ambiguous tool outcomes and partial execution, such as timeouts or failures. It defines a shared admissibility check for key expiry, authorization timing, dependencies, and residual effects, and a terminal certificate to distinguish actual goal satisfaction from publicly supported safe completion. In a finite study of 37 assignments, the approach achieved 28 certified completions, and in a larger comparison of 58 paired units, evidence‑guided advice certified 30 completions versus 9 for evidence prompting, demonstrating a significant improvement in task completion rates.
EpiSEM-Bench is an executable benchmark designed to assess how language‑model agents handle missing safety‑relevant evidence. It comprises 300 matched unsafe/safe task pairs across six domains, systematically suppressing critical facts to measure unsafe execution and failure cardinality. An independent audit tool evaluates whether agents seek missing facts and withhold prohibited actions while completing permissible tasks, revealing variation among ten models in omission robustness, evidence acquisition, and appropriate action.