arXiv:2607. 09770v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Industrial agentic AI systems increasingly exhibit a gap between prototype capability and production deployment.
arXiv:2607. 03386v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic AI systems are increasingly used to edit, refine, and repair decision policies, but evaluating these edits is difficult when per-state expert action labels are unavailable.
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.
arXiv:2606. 02641v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Interactive driving exposes a failure mode that is easy to miss in rule-aware autonomous-driving stacks: a hard-rule margin can be negative for an ego candidate even though a small lawful accommodation by a non-priority agent would restore feasibility.
arXiv:2608. 11344v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Financial institutions are delegating consequential decisions to agentic AI systems that decompose goals, coordinate models and tools, and act with little oversight.
arXiv:2607. 00871v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Self-evolving agents violate the assumption behind most learning-theoretic guarantees: the data, evaluator, components, and hypothesis space are produced by the policy being updated.
arXiv:2608. 13867v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI coding agents are commonly evaluated as models but deployed as systems.
arXiv:2606. 28011v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We propose an agentic Large Language Model (LLM) framework for active Fault-Tolerant Control (FTC) that transforms fault detection outputs into constraint-aware recovery actions grounded in plant-specific knowledge.
arXiv:2605. 27628v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As autonomous and agentic AI systems scale in robotic and human-machine environments, managing hallucination and persistent but unjustified action remains an open challenge.
arXiv:2607. 17641v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Verify-repair loops are a standard means for large language model (LLM) agents to correct faulty plans in code generation, mathematical reasoning, and tool use.
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.
Verify-repair loops are a standard means for large language model (LLM) agents to correct faulty plans in code generation, mathematical reasoning, and tool use. When both the verifier and the repairer are noisy, repair can damage already-correct plans, and reported acceptance keeps rising while true validity falls, so existing methods lack a principled basis for deciding when repair should stop.
arXiv:2607. 05397v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agent systems increasingly execute rather than advise.