Modeling Agentic Technical Debt and Stochastic Tax: A Standalone Framework for Measurement, Simulation, and Dashboarding

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.27320v1
• Date: Tue, 26 May 2026 17:28:30 GMT
• Title: Modeling Agentic Technical Debt and Stochastic Tax: A Standalone Framework for Measurement, Simulation, and Dashboarding
• Abstract summary: This note develops a formal and managerially usable model that distinguishes Agentic Technical Debt from Tax.<n>The two constructs are related, but they are not the same: debt can amplify the tax, while the tax can remain positive even when debt is minimized.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Agentic AI systems combine probabilistic reasoning with delegated action through tools, context, memory, orchestration, and external workflow integration. This note develops a formal and managerially usable model that distinguishes Agentic Technical Debt from Stochastic Tax. Agentic Technical Debt is a stock of accumulated design and governance liability. Stochastic Tax is a recurring flow of operating burden that arises when stochastic agents are used in business workflows. The two constructs are related, but they are not the same: debt can amplify the tax, while the tax can remain positive even when debt is minimized. The note starts from a compact dashboard expression, expands it into a fuller structural model, defines all variables and parameters, shows how each cost category can be estimated from operational data, and illustrates the framework with an accounts-payable simulation and companion spreadsheet.

Related papers

• ACEM: A Cost Estimation Model for Agentic Software Engineering [0.0]
  This paper proposes ACEM (Agentic Cost Estimation Model), which decomposes total agentic development cost into three additive dimensions.<n> ACEM introduces three constructs for agentic dynamics: the Revision Factor (RF), modeling token overhead from output rejection and retries; the Context Factor (CF), capturing rising token consumption as context accumulates; and the HITL Intensity Score (HIS), a four-level oversight classification scheme.<n>As an early-stage proposal, it invites the research community to calibrate, test, and extend the model through real project data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T17:54:11Z)
• VASO: Formally Verifiable Self-Evolving Skills for Physical AI Agents [57.240036084348354]
  We introduce VASO, a framework for verification-guided self-evolution of robot skill contracts.<n>VASO verifies logically inconsistent skill contracts, then verifies plans induced by the skill against global and local temporal specifications.<n>On Clearpath Jackal and PX4 quadcopter tasks, VASO reaches 97.2% formal-specification compliance using fewer than 100 optimization samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-03T20:02:35Z)
• Governing Technical Debt in Agentic AI Systems [0.0]
  We define Agentic Technical Debt as the accumulated liability created when prompts, memory, tool schemas, orchestration graphs, control policies, and observability routines are patched faster than they can be validated, standardized, and governed.<n>We define Tax as the recurring operating burden of keeping probabilistic agent behavior within acceptable bounds.<n>We outline how managers can make both visible through lightweight dashboards and governance controls.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-27T21:42:49Z)
• What do Language Models Learn and When? The Implicit Curriculum Hypothesis [50.89698323917259]
  We propose the Implicit Curriculum Hypothesis: pretraining follows a compositional and predictable curriculum across models.<n>We track emergence points across four model families spanning sizes from 410M-13B parameters.<n>We find that emergence orderings of when models reach fixed accuracy thresholds are strikingly consistent.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-09T17:50:12Z)
• From Perception to Autonomous Computational Modeling: A Multi-Agent Approach [0.0]
  We present a solver-agnostic framework in which coordinated large language model (LLM) agents autonomously execute the complete computational mechanics workflow.<n>Agents are formalised as conditioned operators on a shared context space with quality gates that introduce conditional iteration between pipeline layers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-08T07:56:34Z)
• Explainable Model Routing for Agentic Workflows [0.9379969114114787]
  Topaz is a framework that introduces formal auditability to agentic routing.<n>We present Topaz, a framework that introduces formal auditability to agentic routing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-04T00:11:24Z)
• $V_0$: A Generalist Value Model for Any Policy at State Zero [80.7505802128501]
  Policy methods rely on a baseline to measure the relative advantage of an action.<n>This baseline is typically estimated by a Value Model (Critic) often as large as the policy model itself.<n>We propose a Generalist Value Model capable of estimating the expected performance of any model on unseen prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T14:35:23Z)
• Monadic Context Engineering [59.95390010097654]
  This paper introduces Monadic Context Engineering (MCE) to provide a formal foundation for agent design.<n>We demonstrate how Monads enable robust composition, how Applicatives provide a principled structure for parallel execution, and crucially, how Monad Transformers allow for the systematic composition of these capabilities.<n>This layered approach enables developers to construct complex, resilient, and efficient AI agents from simple, independently verifiable components.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-27T01:52:06Z)
• Managing the Stochastic: Foundations of Learning in Neuro-Symbolic Systems for Software Engineering [0.27195102129094995]
  Current approaches to AI coding agents blur the lines between the Large Language Model and the agent itself.<n>This paper proposes setting the control boundary such that the LLM is treated as a component of the environment environment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-18T15:28:21Z)
• Self-Improving AI Agents through Self-Play [0.0]
  This paper formalizes the AAI capability score as a flow $_r$ parameterized by computational resource $r$.<n>We show that a sufficient condition for $> 0$ is that, up to curvature and step-size effects, the combined noise of generation and verification must be small enough.<n>We apply this formalism to unify the recent literature on Language Self-Play (LSP), Self-Correction, and Synthetic Dataping.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-02T13:13:57Z)
• Language Models and Logic Programs for Trustworthy Financial Reasoning [50.73061215297832]
  Tax filing requires complex reasoning, combining application of overlapping rules with numerical calculations.<n>We propose an approach that integrates LLMs with a symbolic solver to calculate tax obligations.<n>We show how combining up-front translation of plain-text rules into formal logic programs, combined with intelligently retrieved exemplars for formal case representations, can dramatically improve performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-28T17:55:07Z)
• Meaning Representations from Trajectories in Autoregressive Models [106.63181745054571]
  We propose to extract meaning representations from autoregressive language models by considering the distribution of all possible trajectories extending an input text. This strategy is prompt-free, does not require fine-tuning, and is applicable to any pre-trained autoregressive model. We empirically show that the representations obtained from large models align well with human annotations, outperform other zero-shot and prompt-free methods on semantic similarity tasks, and can be used to solve more complex entailment and containment tasks that standard embeddings cannot handle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T04:35:58Z)
• On Exploiting Hitting Sets for Model Reconciliation [53.81101846598925]
  In human-aware planning, a planning agent may need to provide an explanation to a human user on why its plan is optimal. A popular approach to do this is called model reconciliation, where the agent tries to reconcile the differences in its model and the human's model. We present a logic-based framework for model reconciliation that extends beyond the realm of planning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-16T21:25:53Z)

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.