To Throw a Stone with Six Birds: On Agents and Agenthood

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.03239v1
• Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2026 10:46:23 GMT
• Title: To Throw a Stone with Six Birds: On Agents and Agenthood
• Abstract summary: Six Birds Theory (SBT) treats macroscopic objects as induced closures rather than primitives.<n>We give a type-correct account of agency within SBT.<n>We operationalize this contract in finite controlled systems using four checkable components.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Six Birds Theory (SBT) treats macroscopic objects as induced closures rather than primitives. Empirical discussions of agency often conflate persistence (being an object) with control (making a counterfactual difference), which makes agency claims difficult to test and easy to spoof. We give a type-correct account of agency within SBT: a theory induces a layer with an explicit interface and ledgered constraints; an agent is a maintained theory object whose feasible interface policies can steer outside futures while remaining viable. We operationalize this contract in finite controlled systems using four checkable components: ledger-gated feasibility, a robust viability kernel computed as a greatest fixed point under successor-support semantics, feasible empowerment (channel capacity) as a proxy for difference-making, and an empirical packaging map whose idempotence defect quantifies objecthood under coarse observation. In a minimal ring-world with toggles for repair, protocol holonomy, identity staging, and operator rewriting, matched-control ablations yield four separations: calibrated null regimes with single actions show zero empowerment and block model-misspecification false positives; enabling repair collapses the idempotence defect; protocols increase empowerment only at horizons of two or more steps; and learning to rewrite operators monotonically increases median empowerment (0.73 to 1.34 bits). These results provide hash-traceable tests that separate agenthood from agency without making claims about goals, consciousness, or biological organisms, and they are accompanied by reproducible, audited artifacts.

Related papers

• One Gate Is Not Enough: Composing Stateful Pre-Action Controls for Agentic AI [0.0]
  We show that a remediation applied by one control can change the action, evidence, or context another control evaluates, invalidating that control's earlier judgment.<n>We formalize this coupling and give a remediate-and-regate protocol that restores per-action soundness in the current bounded, idempotent setting.<n>This is a mechanism demonstration on open payload data with a synthetic metadata layer, not a claim about production prevalence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-18T22:24:44Z)
• ScrambleToolBench: Agents Search Exhaustively Even When Their Own Map Points to the Next Step [74.83535434786145]
  We introduce ScrambleToolBench, an interactive terminal benchmark designed to isolate behavioral reasoning.<n>The benchmark requires agents to uncover hidden tool behaviors entirely through trial-and-error interaction.<n>Our evaluation of state-of-the-art language models reveals that successful initial discovery does not translate into robust adaptation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T15:07:46Z)
• When Collaboration Becomes a Trigger: Collective Evidence-Threshold Backdoors in Multi-Agent Systems [57.450132281381066]
  Backdoor behavior can be activated when peer evidence reaches a hidden threshold, rather than being determined by any single message.<n>We introduce a collective evidence-threshold backdoor paradigm for MAS and Boundary-Conditioned Backdoor Injection (BCBI)<n>We propose LAtent Transition Test-time Evaluation (LATTE), a clean-only latent-transition defense that learns benign communication dynamics and quarantines anomalous agent updates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-02T08:38:44Z)
• A Five-Plane Reference Architecture for Runtime Governance of Production AI Agents [0.0]
  We present a reference architecture for the governance of production AI agents.<n>We define a taxonomy of six interruption primitives that generalize allow and deny, state and argue for four correctness invariants.<n>We demonstrate the foreclosure of seven production-agent threats across five concrete adjudications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-10T16:54:47Z)
• Interpretation, Learning, and Empathy as One Constraint: A Residual-Adequacy Architecture with Accountable Abstention [0.0]
  We develop a small cognitive architecture in which limits arise from a single quantity.<n>An Interpretation-Decision Unit (IDU) interprets a content vector through a family of regimes and decides which actions it licenses.<n>We prove the unit is total and deterministic: for any content and fixed configuration it halts in finitely many bounded-cost steps with a unique terminal witness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-24T10:57:28Z)
• PRISM: : Planning and Reasoning with Intent in Simulated Embodied Environments [59.07829883257003]
  Built on five multi-room apartments, PRISM structures 300 human-verified tasks into three capability tiers.<n>PRISM exposes an agent-agnostic executable action API that allows arbitrary agents to be evaluated end-to-end.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T04:59:47Z)
• AgentCollabBench: Diagnosing When Good Agents Make Bad Collaborators [0.0]
  We introduce AgentCollabBench, a diagnostic benchmark of 900 human-validated tasks spanning software engineering, DevOps, and data engineering.<n>Each task isolates one of four behavioral risks: instruction decay, false-belief contagion, context leakage, and tracer durability.<n>We evaluate four modern LLMs (GPT 4.1 mini, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite, Qwen-3.5-35B-A3B, and Llama 3.1 8B Instruct)<n> communication topology emerges as a primary risk factor that explains 7-40% of the variance in multi-hop information survival.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-09T03:35:09Z)
• Taming Actor-Observer Asymmetry in Agents via Dialectical Alignment [59.536125286960186]
  Multi-agent frameworks assigning specialized roles are increasingly adopted to enable self-reflection and mutual auditing.<n>We find it simultaneously induces a human-like cognitive bias known as Actor-Observer Asymmetry.<n>ReTAS guides agents to synthesize conflicting viewpoints into an objective consensus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-21T15:05:58Z)
• AgentV-RL: Scaling Reward Modeling with Agentic Verifier [63.55502685076245]
  Verifiers have been demonstrated to enhance LLM reasoning via test-time scaling (TTS)<n>We propose Agentic Verifier, a framework that transforms reward modeling into a multi-turn, tool-augmented deliberative process.<n>We show that Agentic Verifier yields consistent performance gains under both parallel and sequential TTS.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-17T12:27:36Z)
• Compiling Activation Steering into Weights via Null-Space Constraints for Stealthy Backdoors [48.881343993730844]
  Safety-aligned large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world pipelines.<n> adversaries can distribute backdoored checkpoints that behave normally under standard evaluation but jailbreak when a hidden trigger is present.<n>Recent post-hoc weight-editing methods offer an efficient approach to injecting such backdoors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-14T06:48:33Z)
• Dynamic analysis enhances issue resolution [53.50448142467294]
  DAIRA (Dynamic Analysis-enhanced Issue Resolution Agent) is an automated repair framework that embeds dynamic analysis into the agent's reasoning cycle.<n> Driven by a Test Tracing-Driven methodology, DAIRA utilizes lightweight monitors to extract critical runtime data.<n>When powered by Gemini 3 Flash Preview, DAIRA establishes a new state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance, achieving a 79.4% resolution rate on the SWE-bench Verified dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-23T14:48:54Z)
• CoVerRL: Breaking the Consensus Trap in Label-Free Reasoning via Generator-Verifier Co-Evolution [52.691495954442985]
  CoVerRL is a framework where a single model alternates between generator and verifier roles, with each capability bootstrapping the other.<n> Experiments across Qwen and Llama model families demonstrate that CoVerRL outperforms label-free baselines by 4.7-5.9% on mathematical reasoning benchmarks.<n>Self-verification accuracy improves from around 55% to over 85%, confirming that both capabilities genuinely co-evolve.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-18T14:38:55Z)
• Governing Dynamic Capabilities: Cryptographic Binding and Reproducibility Verification for AI Agent Tool Use [0.0]
  No existing security layer verifies what an AI agent can do, whether it executed what it claims, or what happened in a multi-agent interaction.<n>Existing frameworks conflate the two, enabling silent capability escalation and leaving interactions without verifiable provenance.<n>We derive three Agent Governance Requirements: capability integrity (G1), behavioral verifiability (G2), and interaction auditability (G3)<n>We validate with two crypto-agnostic instantiations -- basic (Ed25519, SHA-256; 97 us verify) and enhanced (BBS+ selective disclosure, Groth16 DV-SNARK; 13.8 ms)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-15T11:46:57Z)
• TraceGuard: Process-Guided Firewall against Reasoning Backdoors in Large Language Models [19.148124494194317]
  We propose TraceGuard, a process-guided security framework that transforms small-scale models into robust reasoning firewalls.<n>Our approach treats the reasoning trace as an untrusted payload and establishes a defense-in-depth strategy.<n>We demonstrate robustness against adaptive adversaries in a grey-box setting, establishing TraceGuard as a viable, low-latency security primitive.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T22:19:13Z)
• Verifiable Semantics for Agent-to-Agent Communication [0.2866560512724962]
  Multiagent AI systems require consistent communication.<n>Natural language is interpretable but vulnerable to semantic drift.<n>We propose a certification protocol based on the stimulus-meaning model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-18T12:55:58Z)
• Multi-Agent Debate: A Unified Agentic Framework for Tabular Anomaly Detection [7.807411603618987]
  Multi-Agent Debating framework (MAD) treats disagreement as a first-class signal.<n> MAD produces a normalized anomaly score, confidence, and structured evidence, augmented by a large language model (LLM)-based critic.<n>We show how conformal calibration can wrap the debated score to control false positives under exchangeability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-15T17:44:32Z)
• Sponge Tool Attack: Stealthy Denial-of-Efficiency against Tool-Augmented Agentic Reasoning [58.432996881401415]
  Recent work augments large language models (LLMs) with external tools to enable agentic reasoning.<n>We propose Sponge Tool Attack (STA), which disrupts agentic reasoning solely by rewriting the input prompt.<n>STA generates benign-looking prompt rewrites from the original one with high semantic fidelity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-24T19:36:51Z)
• CARE What Fails: Contrastive Anchored-REflection for Verifiable Multimodal [84.71254539482369]
  Group-relative reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) often wastes the most informative data it already has the failures.<n>We present CARE, a failure-centric post-training framework for multimodal reasoning that turns errors into supervision.<n> CARE improves accuracy and training smoothness while explicitly increasing the share of learning signal that comes from failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-22T16:34:21Z)
• Core Safety Values for Provably Corrigible Agents [2.6451153531057985]
  We introduce the first implementable framework for corrigibility, with provable guarantees in multi-step, partially observed environments.<n>Our framework replaces a single reward with five *structurally separate* utility heads.<n>For open-ended settings where adversaries can modify the agent, we prove that deciding whether an arbitrary post-hack agent will ever violate corrigibility is undecidable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-28T16:19:25Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.