AI agents

Tool use, function calling, orchestration and the protocols that let models act rather than only answer.

15,750 stories · RSS feed

arXiv AI
Sep 15

A primer on evaluation methods for large language models in healthcare

arXiv:2609.14819v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have a growing range of applications in medicine, and their evaluation is critical for ensuring they provide benefit and...

By Suzannah E McKinney, Phuc Vu, Samuel A Justice, Christopher Humphries, Alyssa Pradhan, Timothy J Keyes, Bernardo C Bizzo, Keith J Dreyer, Sarah F Mercaldo, James M Hillis
arXiv AI
Sep 15

From Voice to Value: Leveraging AI to Enhance Spoken Online Reviews on the Go

The paper introduces Vocalizer, a mobile app that lets users submit spoken online reviews enhanced by a large language model. A longitudinal study shows that users often use the AI to add detail and that interactive AI features boost confidence and willingness to share reviews. The authors also outline the benefits and challenges of embedding AI assistance in review-writing systems.

By Kavindu Perera, D\'aniel Szab\'o, Niels van Berkel, Aku Visuri, Chi-Lan Yang, Koji Yatani, Simo Hosio
arXiv AI
Sep 15

Navigating Sparse Evidence: Agentic Visual RAG via Explicit Context Selection and Consolidation

The paper introduces SCoRE, an agentic framework for Visual Retrieval-Augmented Generation that explicitly selects and consolidates visual evidence before generating answers. It addresses two key challenges: sparse, scattered evidence and noisy exploration trajectories that obscure reasoning. By maintaining a textual ledger of relevant observations and reloading original images for a logical evidence sequence, SCoRE decouples reasoning from exploration and enforces strict visual grounding, with training that rewards evidence coverage, compactness, and answer correctness.

By Yucheng Shen, Lingyong Yan, Jiulong Wu, Shuaiqiang Wang, Jianmin WU, Dawei Yin, Min Cao
arXiv AI
Sep 15

LongAgent: History-Guided Agentic Search for Longitudinal Outcome Prediction

LongAgent is an agent-based method designed to extract predictive representations from heterogeneous longitudinal medical data. It autonomously searches over variable sets, temporal windows, and aggregation functions, using a history memory to guide exploration. On synthetic data, it achieves a mean prediction RMSE of 1.7376, outperforming the best non-agent baseline by 0.0151, and performs comparably to the best baseline on a real clinical dataset.

By Siyao Wang, Florian Guitton, Shuojie Fu, Guanyu Tao, Kai Sun, Wenjia Bai
arXiv AI
Sep 15

Personality engineering with AI agents: A new methodology for negotiation research

The article introduces personality engineering, a method that uses AI agents to precisely model negotiator personas based on established personality frameworks. It argues that AI agents, free from human limitations, can rigorously test canonical negotiation theory, which posits that success depends on balancing empathy and assertiveness. The authors propose using the interpersonal circumplex—specifically its warmth and dominance dimensions—as a foundational coordinate system for both theory testing and AI agent design.

By Michelle A. Vaccaro, Jared R. Curhan
arXiv AI
Sep 15

OrchSLM: Probing the Dynamics of Small Language Model Orchestration

OrchSLM is a routing framework that unifies non‑interactive orchestration methods for small language models (SLMs). It allows heterogeneous SLMs to independently generate candidate solutions while a router manages their cached outputs without further model interaction. By systematically probing OrchSLM, the study shows how orchestration behavior depends on task structure, model‑pool composition, and multi‑agent consensus.

By Chengxi Zhang, Yu Yao
arXiv AI
Sep 15

Atria Dawn: The Dawn of Agentic Superintelligence

The paper introduces Atria Dawn Preview, a foundation agentic language model aimed at scientific research and engineering workflows. Trained through a Verifiable Experience Pipeline, it performs competitively across 16 real‑world benchmarks, achieving the highest scores on five. The authors also present a detailed case study of human–AI collaboration, showing that while AI proposes methods and revisions, humans retain final decision‑making and guide the research direction.

By Honglin Guo, Tao Gui, Yicheng Chen, Guanting Dong, Qiming Ge, Yuyang Hu, Zixian Huang, Jiajie Jin, Alexander Lam, Yining Li, Jiahang Lin, Yanjiang Liu, Xinyu Lu, Haijun Lv, Junlin Shang, Qisheng Su, Guoqiang Wang, Rui Wang, Zhecan Wang, Hao Xiang, Xinchen Xie, Shuhao Xing, Xiaoyu Xing, Wanghan Xu, Xinyu Yang, Yajie Yang, Chengfeng Zhao, Haoran Zhao, Ruojun Zhou, Yunhua Zhou, Yicheng Zou, Kun Cai, Qiye Cai, Xinmeng Che, Haodong Chen, Jiabei Chen, Jiahao Chen, Jiayi Chen, Yujia Chen, Lizhi Cui, Youheng Dai, Xin Deng, Yi Dong, Shihan Dou, Chenya Gu, Xu Guo, Ding Han, Feiyang Hao, Haotan He, Jie Hou, Binze Hu, Zijian Hu, Junhao Huang, Huicheng Jiang, Jiazhen Jiang, Shufan Jiang, Jiahao Kuang, Bowen Lai, Bo Li, Jiaqiang Li, Peng Li, Qilong Li, Zhuoqun Li, Jiaxiang Liu, Shuainan Liu, Tong Liu, Yi Liu, Zhonghang Lu, Jianwen Luo, Yanyi Luo, Huijie Lv, Ningsheng Ma, Zerun Ma, Houcheng Min, Chengjun Pan, Qiyuan Peng, Xiaoxuan Peng, Jianmin Qian, Jiantao Qiu, Wanying Ren, Huayu Sha, Jifei Shan, Zixin Shang, Bing Shao, Zhuohui Sheng, Jiayang Shi, Yang Shu, Aierpanjiang Simayi, Sirui Song, Yuxiao Song, Zhe Sun, Zhichao Sun, Wenzhe Tan, Wenhui Tian, Zhongbo Tian, Hanchen Wang, Pengbo Wang, Rui Wang, Yiding Wang, Yuhui Wang, Zhiheng Xi, Caijun Xu, Chao Xu, Yongfeng Xu, Xiaolei Yang, Zhixiong Yang, Qian Yao, Shihong Yi, Yuankai Ying, Jia Yu, Dingbo Yuan, Hao Yuan, Junjie Yuan, Bo Zhang, Caixian Zhang, Qiuyinzhe Zhang, Jiyuan Zhao, Penghao Zhao, Ying Zhao, Pujun Zheng, Xiaoxue Zhong, Xiaohao Zhou, Xinyu Zhou, Dongsheng Zhu, Guanru Zhu, Yulun Zhu, Yaojie Lu, Tao Ji, Hongyu Lin, Yutao Zhu, Pengfei Cao, Guoxiu He, Xianpei Han, Ben He, Zhicheng Dou, Kang Liu, Qi Zhang, Le Sun, Jun Zhao, Ji-Rong Wen, Xuanjing Huang, Yu-Gang Jiang, Bowen Zhou
arXiv AI
Sep 15

AI Deployment Accountability Engineering: A Vision for Accountable AI in Safety-Critical Socio-Technical Systems

The paper proposes AI Deployment Accountability Engineering (ADAE), a new subdiscipline focused on establishing measurable, continuous, and actionable accountability for AI systems once they are deployed. ADAE treats accountability as a deployment-layer property, aiming to ensure systems remain within acceptable risk limits, identify failure contexts, attribute failures across technical and human components, and translate technical failures into downstream consequences. The authors outline a research agenda built around four pillars—structured discovery of context-dependent failure modes, privacy-preserving accountability measurement, system-level risk analysis for agentic AI, and translation of technical failures into operational and institutional risks—to support timely intervention in safety-critical socio-technical environments.

By Murat Kantarcioglu