AI Identity: Standards, Gaps, and Research Directions for AI Agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.23280v1
• Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2026 12:51:52 GMT
• Title: AI Identity: Standards, Gaps, and Research Directions for AI Agents
• Abstract summary: AI agents are now running real transactions, transactions, and sub-agent chains across organizational boundaries without continuous human supervision.<n>This creates a problem no current infrastructure is equipped to solve: how do you identify, verify, and hold accountable an entity with no body, no persistent memory, and no legal standing?<n>We define AI Identity as the continuous relationship between what an AI agent is declared to be and what it is observed to do, bounded by the confidence that those two things correspond at any given moment.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: AI agents are now running real transactions, workflows, and sub-agent chains across organizational boundaries without continuous human supervision. This creates a problem no current infrastructure is equipped to solve: how do you identify, verify, and hold accountable an entity with no body, no persistent memory, and no legal standing? We define AI Identity as the continuous relationship between what an AI agent is declared to be and what it is observed to do, bounded by the confidence that those two things correspond at any given moment. Through a structured survey of industry trends, emerging standards, and technical literature, we conduct a gap analysis across the full agent identity lifecycle and make three contributions: (1) a structural comparison of human and AI identity across four dimensions (substrate, persistence, verifiability, and legal standing) showing that the asymmetry is fundamental and that extending human frameworks to agents without structural modification produces systematic failures; (2) an evaluation of current technical and regulatory documents against the identity requirements of autonomous agents, finding that none adequately address the challenge of governing nondeterministic, boundary-crossing entities; and (3) identification of five critical gaps (semantic intent verification, recursive delegation accountability, agent identity integrity, governance opacity and enforcement, and operational sustainability) that no current technology or regulatory instrument resolves. These gaps are structural; more engineering effort alone will not close them. Foundational research on AI identity is the central conclusion of this report.

Related papers

• TessIndex: Capability Verified Identity System for the Agent Economy [0.0]
  TessIndex is a capability-verified identity system for agent primitives.<n>It binds an agent's existence across capabilities, execution, and reputation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-22T12:49:11Z)
• Authenticity Debt and the Synthetic Content Threat Landscape: A Layered Framework for Trust, Provenance, and IP Governance in the Generative AI Era [2.113921717639734]
  Generative artificial intelligence has fundamentally changed how content is produced.<n>This paper presents a comprehensive, multi-dimensional taxonomy of generative AI harms and attack vectors.<n>We argue that no single mechanism is sufficient in open, adversarial, and evolving environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-30T08:51:55Z)
• AI Identification: An Integrated Framework for Sustainable Governance in Digital Enterprises [3.2625979527355784]
  In digitally transformed enterprises, long-term sustainability depends on transparent, accountable, and lifecycle-governed AI systems.<n>This study proposes a conceptual and architectural framework for AI identification, combining technical and governance mechanisms.<n>The framework integrates five components: model fingerprinting, cryptographic hashing, blockchain-based registration, zero-knowledge proof (ZKP)-based proof of possession, and post-deployment structural change screening.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-12T05:59:47Z)
• The Accountability Horizon: An Impossibility Theorem for Governing Human-Agent Collectives [0.0]
  Existing accountability frameworks for AI systems, legal, ethical, and regulatory, rest on a shared assumption.<n>This paper proves that agentic AI systems violate this assumption as a mathematical necessity once exceeds a computable threshold.<n>We introduce Human-Agent Collectives, a formalisation of joint human-AI systems where agents are modelled as state-policys.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-09T04:08:26Z)
• AI Trust OS -- A Continuous Governance Framework for Autonomous AI Observability and Zero-Trust Compliance in Enterprise Environments [4.3073750462661256]
  This paper proposes AI Trust OS, a governance architecture for continuous, autonomous AI observability and zero-trust compliance.<n>The framework operates through a zero-trust telemetry boundary in which ephemeral read-only probes validate structural metadata.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-06T15:14:10Z)
• Security, privacy, and agentic AI in a regulatory view: From definitions and distinctions to provisions and reflections [53.468443050795344]
  The rapid proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies has led to a dynamic regulatory landscape.<n>As AI paradigms shift towards greater autonomy, specifically in the form of agentic AI, it becomes increasingly challenging to articulate regulatory stipulations.<n>This paper reviews the evolving European Union (EU) AI regulatory provisions via analyzing 24 relevant documents published between 2024 and 2025.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-19T13:50:52Z)
• Operational Agency: A Permeable Legal Fiction for Tracing Culpability in AI Systems [0.31061678033205636]
  This Article introduces Operational Agency (OA)-a permeable legal fiction structured as an ex post evidentiary framework-and Operational Agency Graph (OAG)<n>OA evaluates an AI's observable operational characteristics.<n>OAG operationalizes that analysis by embedding these characteristics in a causal graph to trace and apportion culpability among developers, fine-tuners, deployers, and users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-20T01:49:03Z)
• Towards 6G Native-AI Edge Networks: A Semantic-Aware and Agentic Intelligence Paradigm [85.7583231789615]
  6G positions intelligence as a native network capability, transforming the design of radio access networks (RANs)<n>Within this vision, Semantic-native communication and agentic intelligence are expected to play central roles.<n>Agentic intelligence endows distributed RAN entities with goal-driven autonomy, reasoning, planning, and multi-agent collaboration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-04T03:09:33Z)
• Never Compromise to Vulnerabilities: A Comprehensive Survey on AI Governance [211.5823259429128]
  We propose a comprehensive framework integrating technical and societal dimensions, structured around three interconnected pillars: Intrinsic Security, Derivative Security, and Social Ethics.<n>We identify three core challenges: (1) the generalization gap, where defenses fail against evolving threats; (2) inadequate evaluation protocols that overlook real-world risks; and (3) fragmented regulations leading to inconsistent oversight.<n>Our framework offers actionable guidance for researchers, engineers, and policymakers to develop AI systems that are not only robust and secure but also ethically aligned and publicly trustworthy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T09:42:56Z)
• Rethinking Data Protection in the (Generative) Artificial Intelligence Era [138.07763415496288]
  We propose a four-level taxonomy that captures the diverse protection needs arising in modern (generative) AI models and systems.<n>Our framework offers a structured understanding of the trade-offs between data utility and control, spanning the entire AI pipeline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-03T02:45:51Z)
• Watermarking Without Standards Is Not AI Governance [46.71493672772134]
  We argue that current implementations risk serving as symbolic compliance rather than delivering effective oversight.<n>We propose a three-layer framework encompassing technical standards, audit infrastructure, and enforcement mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T18:10:04Z)
• Artificial Intelligence in Government: Why People Feel They Lose Control [44.99833362998488]
  The use of Artificial Intelligence in public administration is expanding rapidly.<n>While AI promises greater efficiency and responsiveness, its integration into government functions raises concerns about fairness, transparency, and accountability.<n>This article applies principal-agent theory to AI adoption as a special case of delegation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-02T07:46:41Z)
• Governing AI Agents [0.2913760942403036]
  Article looks at the economic theory of principal-agent problems and the common law doctrine of agency relationships.<n>It identifies problems arising from AI agents, including issues of information asymmetry, discretionary authority, and loyalty.<n>It argues that new technical and legal infrastructure is needed to support governance principles of inclusivity, visibility, and liability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-14T07:55:18Z)

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.