Search AI news

Search headlines, summaries and articles to connect the dots.

2026-11-06

arXiv cs.AI13:00

Trust Responsive Runtime Authorization for Agentic AI with Empirical Characterization of Policy Behavior and Parameter Sensitivity

arXiv:2611.06996v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The policy that converts runtime estimates of an autonomous agent's condition into operational authority is rarely specified or measured. We empirically characterize the Trust Responsive Authorization Policy (TRAP), which maps an Authorization Readiness Score (ARS), a weighted combination of runtime trust, operational stability, and contextual risk, onto discrete authorization levels through an asymmetric rule: escalation requires consecutive observations above a band edge plus a margin, while a sharp drop in readiness restricts authority at once. On one matched set of 100 Monte Carlo traces, we compare TRAP with static, trust-only, risk-only, and symmetric policies. Under abrupt degradation, TRAP restricts at onset and re-escalates sooner after recovery than the symmetric policy, with the highest and, descriptively, least variable stability among the adaptive policies, although more of its post-recovery escalations occur below the selected trust threshold. Paired bootstrap intervals exclude zero for the remaining differences. In one-factor sweeps, recovery time rises with the escalation margin and run length, shifts with the score weights, and is unchanged by the restriction threshold. In an exploratory post-freeze experiment, when the same degradation is spread over 5-20 intervals, TRAP restricts only on the 4 traces that retain a single-interval drop above that threshold; averaged over all 100 traces, it holds authority above what readiness supports for 15.9-18.9 of the 20 degradation intervals, against 0.8 under abrupt degradation and about 10 for the symmetric policy. Its restriction advantage therefore depends on degradation being abrupt. All reported values are traceable to the publicly available, versioned research release.

2026-11-04

arXiv cs.AI13:00

EMBERS: Empirically Motivated Robustness Testing of Deep Research Systems via Defect-Guided Fuzzing

arXiv:2611.03723v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Deep Research (DR) systems extend large language models into autonomous agents that decompose complex information needs, iteratively search the web, and synthesize evidence to answer challenging questions. However, their multi-stage execution may introduce robustness risks, as variations in user questions or intermediate search inputs may propagate across research stages and lead to incorrect answers. Existing evaluations focus on task-solving capabilities or robustness against external evidence disturbances, leaving intrinsic weaknesses in DR execution insufficiently explored. Thus, we conduct an empirical study of 1,932 execution trajectories from three representative DR systems and identify nine recurring defect categories across subquestion formulation, online search, and final reasoning. Guided by these findings, we propose EMBERS, an empirically motivated, defect-guided fuzzing framework for robustness testing of DR systems. Starting from correctly answered seed questions, EMBERS generates stage-targeted test inputs using defect-guided mutation, web-search-assisted fidelity assurance, and diversity-aware seed maintenance. Experiments across 16 framework--model--dataset settings show that EMBERS achieves 3.21 times the failure-discovery throughput of the strongest baseline under identical testing budgets. Human and LLM-assisted evaluations demonstrate that most generated inputs preserve the original information need and necessary contextual constraints. Moreover, model fine-tuning experiments show consistent-answer performance improvement, highlighting their value for robustness testing and model improvement.