CASEL (Consequence-Aware Selective Execution Layer) is a runtime allocation policy for tool‑using language agents that chooses among direct execution, verification, sandboxing, clarification, approval, and abstention for each proposed tool call. It combines calibrated failure probability, state‑dependent consequence, reversibility, ambiguity, and evidence freshness to minimize a per‑mode cost. In controlled simulations, CASEL cuts harmful‑side‑effect trajectories from 14.75 % to 7.02 % and reduces mean normalized harm from 0.184 to 0.123 compared to an uncertainty‑ranked gate.
arXiv:2609.16305v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly operate over long-horizon interactions involving tool use, persistent state, evolving authorization, and...
arXiv:2608.21423v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic security uses large-language-model (LLM) agents to plan, dispatch, and interpret security tools. As these systems move from demonstrations to...
Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly operate over long-horizon interactions involving tool use, persistent state, evolving authorization, and external environment feedback. In such settings,...
The paper introduces Probabilistic Agentic Programming (PAP), a framework that explicitly defines responsibility boundaries for language‑model agents by linking mandate, authority, effects, and evidence. It compares PAP to various programming paradigms and agent systems across seven dimensions, and presents a mediation kernel that enforces checks before tool execution, operation‑bound approval, and resource limits. An exploratory study with seven business cases and multiple models demonstrates that PAP’s native Touba implementation achieves the highest or tied observation counts, supporting its effectiveness in managing agentic behavior.
LPS-Bench is a benchmark designed to evaluate the safety awareness of computer‑use agents (CUAs) in long‑horizon planning tasks that involve tool workflows. It uses a template‑guided multi‑agent pipeline to generate user instructions, simulated toolkits, and case‑specific safety criteria, followed by human review, allowing scalable expansion without building separate application environments. The benchmark includes 570 cases from 65 scenarios across seven task domains and nine planning‑risk types, and an LLM‑based evaluator assesses tool choices, arguments, and responses throughout execution. Evaluations of 13 LLM agents show persistent safety failures in both benign and adversarial settings, with prompt‑based interventions providing only model‑dependent improvements.
The paper introduces Aegis, a runtime governance system for agentic AI that treats model outputs as action proposals and mediates them through a trusted decision layer before tool execution. Aegis evaluates proposals against active policy, resolves provenance server‑side, fails closed under uncertainty, and routes selected cases through a Senate‑style settlement process. In a sandbox evaluation across 6,300 rows, Aegis prevented all governed mock‑tool applications and risky side‑effect completions, preserving provenance and quorum evidence for all settled cases.
arXiv:2606. 29654v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-agent deliberation among LLMs can improve reasoning, but deployment requires deciding when the current answer is reliable enough to act on and when it should be escalated to human review.
Praxa is an evidence‑bound harness for governed AI agent execution that explicitly represents states such as proposal, authority, dispatch, verified external effect, and promotion through deterministic admission, brokered execution, external read‑back, reconciliation, and reviewed promotion. The authors report four evidence lanes: a repository‑local audit passing all unit and Workerd tests; a pilot on 12 curated tasks where both baseline and reliability‑layer arms passed 17 of 36 trials; a coordination‑proxy comparison where both baseline and a source‑authored candidate completed all 180 trials with equal accuracy but the candidate used fewer tokens and steps; and deployed source/configuration evidence showing bounded reflection, recall accounting, memory compilation, and tool‑health paths. None of the evidence demonstrates superiority in security, safety, or user benefit. whyItMatters:"Praxa provides a testable architecture that makes authority‑to‑effect transitions explicit, offering a framework for verifying AI agent behavior, though current evidence does not prove improved security or performance."
arXiv:2609.16313v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In agentic distributed systems, an agent may be authorized to mutate external infrastructure while lacking evidence that the mutation is ready to exe...
arXiv:2610.18948v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Finite safety assessments cannot exclude an adversary that preserves unattacked behavior until certification and activates afterward. We characterize...
arXiv:2609.26048v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Language-model agents often reach a working solution and then fail to consistently deliver it. We study runtime policies: targeted natural-language i...
arXiv:2609.36570v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Indirect prompt injection makes an LLM agent treat untrusted retrieved text as instructions. We present CounterSteer, an inference-time defense that...