← Back to all news
arXiv AI By Yukiko Kato

Epistemic Disturbance in the Graph Model for Conflict Resolution: State-Preserving Actions, Four-Valued Assessments, and the Distinction between Capability and Intention

Read the original on arXiv AI →

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.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

Related stories

arXiv AI
Sep 25

The Troy Moment: How LLM Agents Adjudicate the Decision Point Under Impossible Tasks, Claimed Authority, and Peer Information

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.

By Ivy Zhang
llmsagentssafety
More like this →
arXiv AI
Aug 20

One Gate Is Not Enough: Composing Stateful Pre-Action Controls for Agentic AI

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.

By Gaston Besanson
agents
More like this →