arXiv AI

A Diagnostic Framework for AI Agent Behavior

arXiv:2607. 17149v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents increasingly act within the same clinical, political, scientific, and social systems that behavioral scientists study.

arXiv AI
Aug 20

Position: Behavioral Systems Require Behavioral Tests

The paper argues that artificial agentic systems, which operate as behavioral systems by interacting with dynamic environments, pursuing goals, and adapting over time, should be evaluated through systematic observation, perturbation, and interpretation of their actions rather than solely on performance outcomes. It draws on lessons from behavioral sciences to motivate this position and proposes a research agenda that includes methods for recovering decision strategies from action sequences, constructing environments that isolate behavioral differences, and probing emergent dynamics in multi‑agent systems. These directions aim to establish a rigorous science of AI behavior.

By Manuel Cherep, Nikhil Singh, Pattie Maes
arXiv AI
Sep 16

Agentic Societies Need a Social Harness

arXiv:2609.17527v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: An agentic society is a collection of AI agents that coordinate autonomously across trust boundaries, on behalf of different principals whose objecti...

By Tapan Chugh, Vidushi Singh, Krish Jain, Arvind Krishnamurthy, Ratul Mahajan
arXiv AI
Sep 4

Reducing Catastrophic Risk from AI with Systematic Monitoring and Evaluation of Rogue AI Progression

The article proposes a structured framework of behavioral indicators that could signal a progression toward potentially catastrophic threats from AI systems. Drawing on established methods from cybersecurity and national security, it defines clear metrics, indicators, and thresholds across multiple dimensions of AI capability and behavior. The framework is intended to enable researchers and policymakers to implement evidence‑based monitoring protocols for rogue AI progression.

By T. Bauer, W. P. Kegelmeyer, E. Begoli, A. Sadovnik, T. Emerson, C. Corley, N. Generous, J. Moore, B. Bartoldson, R. Goldhan, M. Goldman, M. Greaves, M. J. D. Vermeer, B. MacLennan, D. Schulker, N. VanHoudnos, J. Bansemer, Y. Bengio
arXiv AI
Sep 12

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The article "Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks" surveys the lack of a standard definition for AI agents and organizes this ambiguity into five dimensions: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal‑directed behavior, and temporal coherence. It reviews how each dimension has been conceptualized in prior work and compiles the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess them. The authors also introduce the Agent Compendium, a public digital resource that extends these evaluation methods, aiming to provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems.

By Mia Lassiter, Brinnae Bent
arXiv AI
Sep 15

Governing at Machine Speed: An Adaptive Intelligence Architecture for Real-Time AI Policy Enforcement

The paper "Governing at Machine Speed: An Adaptive Intelligence Architecture for Real-Time AI Policy Enforcement" highlights a gap in enterprise AI governance, where 78% of organizations lack auditable evidence of policy enforcement. It introduces AGIL, a five-layer adaptive governance architecture that uses machine learning for real-time detection, risk classification, sub-100ms policy enforcement, continuous attestation, and policy evolution. The authors argue that the failure is organizational and architectural, not technical, and call for future empirical validation of AGIL.

By Sandeep Bokkasam, B. Durgalakshmi
arXiv AI
Jun 19

Measuring Biological Capabilities and Risks of AI Agents

arXiv:2606. 19899v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This paper addresses a rapidly emerging policy challenge: how to generate and interpret credible evidence about the biological capabilities and risks of AI scientists, or agentic AI systems capable of autonomously or collaboratively performing multi-step scientific tasks.

By Patricia Paskov, Jeffrey Lee, Kyle Brady, Alyssa Worland