Verify-Gated Completion as Admission Control in a Governed Multi-Agent Runtime: A Bounded Architecture Case Study
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.17998v2
- Date: Thu, 21 May 2026 02:11:25 GMT
- Title: Verify-Gated Completion as Admission Control in a Governed Multi-Agent Runtime: A Bounded Architecture Case Study
- Abstract summary: We study verify-gated completion as an admission-control pattern for governed multi-agent runtimes.<n>We show that under observed conditions, a read-only verify gate plus packetized admission records made completion decisions inspectable and fail-closed.
- Score: 0.6875312133832079
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: As multi-agent systems move from short interactions to tool-using workflows with specialized roles and persistent state, completion becomes a runtime-control problem rather than a purely generative one. This preprint studies verify-gated completion as an admission-control pattern for governed multi-agent runtimes: agents may propose completion, but a read-only verifier decides whether the claim is admitted. Ambiguous or weakly evidenced cases resolve fail-closed, while packetized state and event traces preserve an audit path. We examine one bounded reference implementation and ask what the released evidence can support about auditable, verify-gated completion. In the released verify-completed slice, the known-outcome invoked-event verify success share was 1,791/1,800 = 99.5%. This is an accounting measure over invoked verification events, not a task-completion, production-reliability, or benchmark-success rate. Task-level verify coverage is not computable; 1,762/1,801 rows came from one high-volume reporting cluster; and only 17 events were production-classified. A shadow Policy/Governance Verifier evaluation showed 1,526/1,548 = 98.58% rule agreement, 0/1,526 false-success among safe-to-proceed predictions, and blocked precision of 2/518 = 0.39%, so it remains advisory. The evidence supports a narrow conclusion: under observed conditions, a read-only verify gate plus packetized admission records made completion decisions inspectable and fail-closed. Claims about deployed operation, safety guarantees, outcome gains, task-level coverage, recovery effectiveness, or external validity remain outside scope.
Related papers
- Zero-Knowledge Predicate Proofs Between AI Agents: A Measured, Cross-Protocol Gateway and the Source-Integrity Gap [0.0]
Multi-agent AI platforms move quickly from staging to production, but the way agents establish trust remains rudimentary.<n>We take provable data minimisation between agents from proposal to running system.<n>A 32-bit threshold predicate proves in 6.2 ms and verifies in 1.0 ms with a 608-byte Bulletproofs proof.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-30T23:16:17Z) - MAP-Graph: Provenance-Aware Shared Memory for Multi-Agent Workflows [21.565934900490166]
We introduce MAP-Graph, a provenance-aware memory layer that represents agents, sources, memories, claims, and actions in a typed execution graph.<n>It traces ancestry, excludes permission-ineligible records, reranks eligible memories by semantic similarity and multiplicative path trust, and applies a risk-sensitive gate before action execution while retaining affected lineage for audit.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-11T05:31:18Z) - From Trajectories to Evidence: Auditable Experimental Records for Industrial Research Agents [47.678562263387214]
Research agents increasingly conduct multi-round machine-learning experiments in industrial recommendation settings.<n>Yet a completed trajectory is not automatically evidence: generated artifacts may be unsupported or incomplete, executed rounds may be invalid or confounded, and later modifications may obscure earlier findings.<n>We introduce an evidence-grounded framework that couples bounded verification of consequential artifacts with post-execution claim qualification.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-05T13:37:38Z) - Turning Interaction History into Execution State: A Runtime Layer for Long-Horizon Coding Agents [48.967927222079965]
Ledger is a runtime layer that distills an agent's completed interactions into an explicit execution state.<n> Ledger keeps this state in an online execution ledger and applies it at two boundaries of every step.<n>Across all 500 SWE-bench Verified instances, Ledger raises Pass@1 from 56.2% to 64.2% with GPT-5 mini and from 75.8% to 81.0% with MiniMax M2.5.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-01T18:25:00Z) - Towards Trustworthy Embodied Intelligence: A Systems Framework and Graded Trustworthiness Levels [53.63220028820581]
Embodied intelligence integrates learned perception and decision making with real-time computation, control, and physical interaction.<n>We define trustworthy embodied intelligence as the sustained capacity to execute specified tasks reliably.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-28T17:50:44Z) - Proof-Carrying Agent Actions: Model-Agnostic Runtime Governance for Heterogeneous Agent Systems [0.6526824510982799]
This paper presents Proof-Carrying Agent Actions (PCAA), a runtime-neutral governance model centered on an action certificate.<n>PCAA organizes control around five checkpoints: pre-action admissibility, action open, assumption capture, approval, and outcome closure.<n>We study the model through a reference implementation in a heterogeneous agent control plane and a disclosure-bounded evaluation protocol.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-02T18:10:35Z) - What to Test Next: Interpretable Coverage Gap Discovery in Driving VLMs [52.50210189669399]
Driving vision-language models (VLMs) must accurately understand scenes across diverse conditions defined by Operational Design Domains (ODDs)<n>We propose SliceScorer, a deterministic scoring rule for missing-slice recommendation.<n>We show that SliceNav surfaces high-risk coverage gaps more effectively than prior slice-discovery methods.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-01T03:18:01Z) - ClawForge: Generating Executable Interactive Benchmarks for Command-Line Agents [59.626170560327274]
We present textbfClawForge, a generator-backed benchmark framework for executable command-line categories under state conflict.<n>We instantiate this framework as the ClawForge-Bench (17 scenarios, 6 ability categories)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-13T21:34:08Z) - Can Agent Benchmarks Support Their Scores? Evidence-Supported Bounds for Interactive-Agent Evaluation [8.049844623361725]
Interactive agent benchmarks map an agent run to a binary outcome through outcome checks.<n>These checks rely on surface level signals or fail to capture the agent's actual action path.<n>We introduce an outcome evidence reporting layer for existing benchmarks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-11T12:20:15Z) - A Benchmark for Strategic Auditee Gaming Under Continuous Compliance Monitoring [1.253312107729806]
Continuous post-deployment compliance audits create a class of strategic gaming.<n>We formalize continuous auditing as a $T$-round Stackelberg game between an auditor that commits to a temporal policy and an adaptive auditee.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-07T14:28:34Z) - Partial Evidence Bench: Benchmarking Authorization-Limited Evidence in Agentic Systems [0.0]
This paper introduces Partial Evidence Bench, a deterministic benchmark for measuring that failure mode.<n>The benchmark ships three scenario families -- due diligence, compliance audit, and security incident response.<n>It evaluates systems along four surfaces: answer correctness, completeness awareness, gap-report quality, and unsafe completeness behavior.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-06T19:01:29Z) - Verifier-Bound Communication for LLM Agents: Certified Bounds on Covert Signaling [0.0]
Colluding language-model agents can hide coordination in messages that remain policy-compliant at the surface level.<n>We present CLBC, a protocol where generation and admission are separated.<n>We show how this protocol yields an upper bound on transcript leakage in terms of latent leakage plus explicit residual channels.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-27T23:42:37Z) - Detecting Object Tracking Failure via Sequential Hypothesis Testing [80.7891291021747]
Real-time online object tracking in videos constitutes a core task in computer vision.<n>We propose interpreting object tracking as a sequential hypothesis test, wherein evidence for or against tracking failures is gradually accumulated over time.<n>We propose both supervised and unsupervised variants by leveraging either ground-truth or solely internal tracking information.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-13T14:57:15Z) - Preventing the Collapse of Peer Review Requires Verification-First AI [49.995126139461085]
We propose truth-coupling, i.e. how tightly venue scores track latent scientific truth.<n>We formalize two forces that drive a phase transition toward proxy-sovereign evaluation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-23T17:17:32Z) - DoVer: Intervention-Driven Auto Debugging for LLM Multi-Agent Systems [48.971606069204825]
DoVer is an intervention-driven debug framework for large language model (LLM)-based multi-agent systems.<n>It augments hypothesis generation with active verification through targeted interventions.<n>DoVer flips 18-28% of failed trials into successes, achieves up to 16% milestone progress, and validates or refutes 30-60% of failure hypotheses.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-07T09:23:48Z) - Evidence-Bound Autonomous Research (EviBound): A Governance Framework for Eliminating False Claims [0.609170287691728]
EviBound is an evidence-bound execution framework that eliminates false claims through dual governance gates.<n>The pre-execution Approval Gate validates acceptance criteria schemas before code runs.<n>The post-execution Verification Gate validates artifacts via MLflow API queries.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-28T17:47:13Z) - VulAgent: Hypothesis-Validation based Multi-Agent Vulnerability Detection [55.957275374847484]
VulAgent is a multi-agent vulnerability detection framework based on hypothesis validation.<n>It implements a semantics-sensitive, multi-view detection pipeline, each aligned to a specific analysis perspective.<n>On average, VulAgent improves overall accuracy by 6.6%, increases the correct identification rate of vulnerable--fixed code pairs by up to 450%, and reduces the false positive rate by about 36%.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-09-15T02:25:38Z)
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.