arXiv AI

Do we have the knowledge we need? Rethinking human-AI decision-making in corporations

arXiv:2606. 15575v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Organizational knowledge is fragmented across a variety of software systems, tacit expertise, and manual documents that have traditionally been designed for human consumption.

arXiv AI
6d ago

What Will Remain Human in Software Architecture? A Focus Group Report

The report examines how software architects view the growing use of AI development agents in their field. A focus group of 22 industry and academic participants discussed current practices, trust, validation, governance, and educational implications, concluding that decision‑making, accountability, and guardrail authoring remain human responsibilities. They introduced the concept of harness engineering—building systems that govern AI‑assisted creation—and identified criticality and cognitive debt as key factors for calibrating human oversight.

By Uwe van Heesch, Olaf Zimmermann, Christian Kohls
arXiv AI
Aug 11

The Scaling Paradox in Human-AI Collaboration

arXiv:2608. 00818v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The discovery of scaling laws has highlighted the extraordinary potential of AI systems with a striking empirical pattern: as AI systems scale, their capabilities tend to improve predictably.

By Anyan Qi, Mengxin Wang
arXiv AI
Aug 5

Enactive Artificial Intelligence: A Decision-Centric Architecture for Complex Systems

arXiv:2608. 03413v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to evolve and mature, recent AI practices have moved beyond large language models (LLMs) and text or image generation tasks, increasingly integrating tools, agents, and harnesses to solve real business and industrial problems.

By Zuojun Max Shen, Yuan Qu, Pujun Zhang, Anbang Liu, Yunhao Liang
arXiv AI
Aug 24

Who Delegates to AI? Evidence from 53,000 Agent Configurations

The paper introduces the Agentic Adoption Index (AAI), a new metric that captures whether workers actually delegate tasks to AI within their workflows, rather than merely measuring potential AI applicability. Using 53,000 agent skill specifications and 18,000 O*NET task statements, the authors find that occupations with high delegation differ from those previously deemed most at risk, that AAI aligns more closely with AI’s capabilities than current usage, and that adoption peaks at mid‑wage, bachelor’s‑level occupations while declining at both ends of the wage and education spectrum. The study highlights that technical availability explains much of the variation, but other factors—such as resistance to specification or professional discretion—also influence who adopts AI. whyItMatters":"The findings suggest that actual AI adoption patterns differ from prior risk assessments, indicating that factors beyond technical feasibility shape who delegates to AI, which has implications for workforce planning and policy."

By Hyeongjae Lee, Jihyang Cheon, Lanu Kim