arXiv AI By Amey Rambatla, Vatsal Goel, Sagar Gaur, Siddhant Loya, Anurag Mishra, Asif Mohammad

Signals: Continuous Diagnostics of AI Agents

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The paper "Signals: Continuous Diagnostics of AI Agents" introduces a method for diagnosing problems in AI agents by analyzing agentic traces. It defines 45 problem types across eight families, categorizes findings into engineering issues called Signals, and assesses their severity. The method was evaluated on public agent executions, achieving a 91.43% F1 score in matching Signals to reference issues, outperforming a one-pass LLM control by about 18 percentage points.

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.

arXiv AI
Oct 16

AgentEval: Evidence-Bounded Assessment of Stateful Agents

AgentEval is a system that tracks a contract-bound assessment record throughout a stateful agent’s tool execution, capturing state, events, and evidence to determine whether obligations are satisfied, violated, or unresolved. In 32 tool‑world administrations, independent checks confirmed all 30 complete episodes, while controlled interventions on 48 evidence views uncovered 36 binding faults that hash‑only checks missed. A public‑benchmark study on 192 held‑out executions identified ten completed subgoals within broader task failures and highlighted the impact of missing evidence on overall task success.

By Ruiqi Gao (Alibaba Cloud, Alibaba Group)
arXiv AI
Sep 10

Explaining AI Agents Through Execution Traces

arXiv:2609.06063v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI Agents are increasingly deployed in real-world settings, where they interact with external tools and make sequential decisions with limited human ov...

By Vittoria Vineis, Fabiano Veglianti, Lorenzo Antonelli, Claudia Di Carlo, Matteo Silvestri, Gabriele Tolomei
arXiv AI
Sep 11

Can AI Agents Detect and Repair Artifact Drift in Network Experiments?

The paper introduces NetArtifactBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate whether AI agents can detect and repair inconsistencies in network experiment records while preserving supported claims. It tests 23 agent configurations on 52 instances with injected inconsistencies, finding an average pass rate of 65.3 % but no runtime exceeding 30 % for complex repairs that require recovering implicit relations and propagating changes across artifacts. The results highlight a clear distinction between local corrections and full record-level repair, leading the authors to argue that artifact integrity should be a primary design and evaluation criterion for AI agents in network systems.

By Tianzhu Zhang, Weichen Tao, Changgang Zheng, Yusheng Zheng, Long Chen, Xiaoyi Fan, Meikang Qiu