arXiv AI
Generator-Independent Runtime Assurance under Partial Observation
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Jul 28
What Can Be Enforced? A Theory of Certified Runtime Safety for Tool-Using Agents
arXiv:2607. 22868v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Runtime guardrails act before irreversible tool calls, but their guarantees depend on what policy state is representable, what a judge observes, and whether intervention changes future behavior.
arXiv AI
Jul 7
The Unverifiability of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) Alignment, Static and Dynamic: From Trakhtenbrot's Wall to the Safety-Generality Tension
arXiv:2606. 28639v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We establish the mathematical limits of AGI safety in two forms: verifying a fixed system, and verifying that a certified safety property persists once the system self-modifies.
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 21
When Can Safe Controllers Adapt? Information before Commitment
arXiv:2607. 16895v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safe adaptive control is online adaptation under a safety guarantee on the learning trajectory itself.
arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 1
Certified Speculative Execution for Untrusted AI Agents
arXiv:2606. 31023v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Hard-constrained sequential decision systems have no certified way to spend the test-time compute of modern AI: executing the multi-step drafts of a learned policy or a frozen LLM forfeits the feasibility guarantee a trusted solver provides, while invoking the solver at every step forfeits the speed the AI offers.
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Aug 18
An Omitted Mode Is a Rare Rule: The Sampling-Verification Danger Law in Continuous Code World Models
The paper investigates the safety of Code World Models, where a language model generates an executable world model that a planner uses, and the model is accepted if it reproduces sampled transitions. It defines the pipeline’s danger as the expected risk, showing that the probability of missing a critical event across N independent rollouts is (1‑r)^N, and that an additional acceptance sample adds to the exponent. Experiments on hybrid instruments reveal that mode‑blind models can be exploited, and the authors provide theoretical bounds on localization budgets and demonstrate that acceptance only guarantees sample consistency, covering about two percent of the planner’s queries.
arXiv AI
Aug 19
An Omitted Mode Is a Rare Rule: The Sampling-Verification Danger Law in Continuous Code World Models
The paper investigates the safety of Code World Models, where a language model generates executable world models that a planner uses. It shows that accepting a model based on sampled transitions only guarantees sample consistency, not full safety, because the probability of missing critical events decays as (1‑r)^N. Experiments on hybrid instruments reveal that omitted mode‑boundaries can severely limit planner performance, and that even sophisticated LLMs (GPT‑5.x) struggle to repair such omissions in higher‑dimensional settings.