The paper extends the graph model for conflict resolution (GMCR) by introducing state‑preserving actions—announcements, leaks, and selective disclosures—that alter only the epistemic states of decision makers without changing the physical state. It augments GMCR with a four‑valued assessment framework distinguishing evidence for and against moves, showing how such evidence influences perceived move availability and stability judgments. The analysis clarifies how capability and intention assessments affect different stability concepts and illustrates the implications using the 1995 DVD format negotiation case.
arXiv:2608.24569v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents build on one another's work through summaries, plans, and other intermediate artifacts. These records let a downs...
arXiv:2609.08015v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Long-running AI agents may read state, reason, wait for tools or human approval, and perform an external action much later. The state that justified th...
The paper investigates how large language model agents decide whether to persist, stop, or escalate when faced with impossible software‑repair tasks that also involve conflicting test requirements. Using ImpossibleBench tasks and models such as GPT‑5.6 Sol, Claude Fable 5.1, and Gemini 3.8 Flash, the study varies peer precedent, forged authority claims, instruction wording, and tool friction to observe differing adjudication policies. The authors propose a conflict adjudication framework that maps information to interpretation to action, arguing it better captures agent alignment under competing pressures.
The paper investigates how multiple pre‑action controls—authority, resource, and evidence gates—interact in agentic AI systems. It formalizes remediation‑induced control coupling, showing that remediation can invalidate earlier judgments and that the order of remediation matters. The authors propose a remediate‑and‑regate protocol to restore soundness, analyze non‑commuting remediation operators, and demonstrate the approach on a deterministic open‑data artifact with three published engines.
arXiv:2610.17643v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: An enterprise agent that answers under a written policy must choose an action before it says anything: answer, ask for a missing fact, ask for confirma...
arXiv:2606. 12502v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We propose that value -- the quantity goal-directed agents create, destroy, and exchange -- is a lawful structural quantity in the same category as information.
arXiv:2609.25686v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Long-horizon assigned work requires an LLM agent to track the state of a task: which steps are done, blocked, cancelled, or open to repetition. Agent...
Large language model agents coordinate tasks via multi‑role, multi‑stage workflows that transform upstream state into intermediate artifacts such as summaries and plans. The study shows that when these artifacts are transformed—through compression, plan assimilation, or other handoff methods—the strict action‑binding constraints on upstream state can be weakened, turning mandatory requirements into optional information. In 1,296 synthetic episodes, direct handoff preserved all safety blockers, whereas transformed handoffs frequently deactivated or forbidden actions, but restoring full state fields or applying downstream verification can recover preservation.
arXiv:2610.20532v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A multimodal agent must decide whether visual evidence is worth acquiring, which candidate or resolution to query, and when further interaction can n...
The paper introduces a new evaluation for large language model agents called epistemic humility (EH), which measures an agent’s ability to recognize, act on, and communicate uncertainty when evidence conflicts with prior beliefs. EH is operationalized through three trajectory-level behaviors—Identify, Solve, and Escalate (ISE)—and tested in both controlled and naturally occurring knowledge conflict scenarios. Results show that higher task accuracy does not guarantee greater epistemic humility, and that model-level interventions can improve EH but often reduce accuracy, indicating that humility depends on the interplay between the backbone model, agent harness, and environment.
arXiv:2601. 16152v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Data systems increasingly operate under persistent legal, political, and analytic disagreement, where no single interpretive authority can be assumed.
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.