Acting with AI: An Interaction-Based Framework for Agentic Tort Liability

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.00518v1
• Date: Sat, 30 May 2026 04:17:47 GMT
• Title: Acting with AI: An Interaction-Based Framework for Agentic Tort Liability
• Abstract summary: This paper proposes an interaction-based framework for agentic torts.<n>We distinguish three interaction types: autonomous drift, pure tool use, and collaborative planning.
• Score: 0.5302037689168743
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Agentic AI systems can plan over multiple steps, use tools, and execute tasks over time. When such systems cause harm, tort law struggles to allocate responsibility because the harmful path may be neither fully chosen by the user nor specifically foreseen by the developer. This paper proposes an interaction-based framework for agentic torts, drawing on Michael Bratman's planning theory and on the common law's treatment of human-human concerted action. We distinguish three interaction types: autonomous drift, pure tool use, and collaborative planning. Pure tool cases remain governed by ordinary product-defect and warning doctrines; collaborative planning cases map onto the independent contractor control test, professional malpractice, and negligent misrepresentation; autonomous drift maps onto frolic and detour under respondeat superior and strict product liability. The framework treats the stateful interaction log as the primary evidentiary trace, allowing courts to infer where the human-AI trajectory departed from the authorized undertaking and where liability should attach. We resolve four incident-anchored cases, situate the account alongside strict-liability and insurance-based proposals, note its relationship to regulatory oversight, and propose a ``Reasonable Agent'' standard built around constraint verification, epistemic transparency, runtime grounding, and forensic logging.

Related papers

• Adversarial Attacks for Good: A Survey of Proactive Protection across the Visual Content Lifecycle [65.6642776933861]
  This survey examines the protective paradigm that has grown around this intervention point.<n>We find that most protections are still validated mainly against static or weakly adaptive adversaries.<n>We close by consolidating cross-stage countermeasures and open problems for robust, composable, and deployable owner-side protection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-05T00:46:50Z)
• Securing Agentic AI: From Per-Action Checks to Trajectory Assurance [8.523545468742919]
  As large language model (LLM)-based agents become more autonomous, securing them evolves from a single challenge into a broad and interconnected landscape spanning the entire agentic stack.<n>Perhaps the most fundamental challenge is behavioral containment: sequences of individually permissible actions may collectively violate system-level constraints and safety invariants.<n>At the broader level, supply-chain integrity, provenance, accountability, and end-to-end observability remain largely open problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T00:28:49Z)
• Operational Hallucination and Safety Drift in AI Agents [0.3823356975862005]
  Large language models (LLMs) serving as planners in tool-using autonomous agents introduce dynamic reliability risks in multi-turn execution.<n>This paper empirically characterizes two observed failure modes across multiple state-of-the-art LLMs: Safety Drift and Operational Hallucination.<n>We propose an Action-Aware Supervision Layer - a lightweight, plug-and-play architectural blueprint incorporating intent-action consistency checks, state tracking, and forced termination primitives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-20T17:01:50Z)
• Provably Secure Agent Guardrail [89.79561918065122]
  Existing defense architectures rely on empirical semantic guardrails and probabilistic large model adjudicators.<n>This paper proposes a new security paradigm for agents based on the fundamental limitations of logical reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-28T02:12:41Z)
• IMPACT-HOI: Supervisory Control for Onset-Anchored Partial HOI Event Construction [72.51952455865155]
  We present IMPACT-HOI, a mixed-initiative framework for annotating egocentric procedural video.<n> IMPACT-HOI frames this task as the incremental resolution of a partially specified, onset-anchored event state.<n>A user study with 9 participants shows a 13.5% reduction in manual annotation actions, a 46.67% event match rate, and zero confirmed-field violations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-03T01:37:40Z)
• Think Before You Act -- A Neurocognitive Governance Model for Autonomous AI Agents [4.064061517379954]
  The rapid deployment of autonomous AI agents across enterprise, healthcare, and safety-critical environments has created a fundamental governance gap.<n>We address this gap by drawing on how humans self-govern naturally: before acting, humans engage deliberate cognitive processes grounded in executive function.<n>This paper proposes a neurocognitive governance framework that formally maps this human self-governance process to agent reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-28T14:15:20Z)
• 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)
• Beyond Fluency: Toward Reliable Trajectories in Agentic IR [0.0]
  This position paper synthesizes failure modes observed in industrial agentic systems.<n>We argue that safe deployment requires moving beyond endpoint accuracy toward trajectory integrity and causal attribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-05T21:20:57Z)
• Agents of Chaos [50.53354213047402]
  We report an exploratory red-teaming study of autonomous language-model-powered agents deployed in a live laboratory environment.<n>Twenty AI researchers interacted with the agents under benign and adversarial conditions.<n>Our findings establish the existence of security-, privacy-, and governance-relevant vulnerabilities in realistic deployment settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T16:28:48Z)
• 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)
• The Why Behind the Action: Unveiling Internal Drivers via Agentic Attribution [63.61358761489141]
  Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents are widely used in real-world applications such as customer service, web navigation, and software engineering.<n>We propose a novel framework for textbfgeneral agentic attribution, designed to identify the internal factors driving agent actions regardless of the task outcome.<n>We validate our framework across a diverse suite of agentic scenarios, including standard tool use and subtle reliability risks like memory-induced bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-21T15:22:21Z)
• Toward a Theory of Agents as Tool-Use Decision-Makers [89.26889709510242]
  We argue that true autonomy requires agents to be grounded in a coherent epistemic framework that governs what they know, what they need to know, and how to acquire that knowledge efficiently.<n>We propose a unified theory that treats internal reasoning and external actions as equivalent epistemic tools, enabling agents to systematically coordinate introspection and interaction.<n>This perspective shifts the design of agents from mere action executors to knowledge-driven intelligence systems, offering a principled path toward building foundation agents capable of adaptive, efficient, and goal-directed behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-01T07:52:16Z)
• Agentic AI: Autonomy, Accountability, and the Algorithmic Society [0.2209921757303168]
  Agentic Artificial Intelligence (AI) can autonomously pursue long-term goals, make decisions, and execute complex, multi-turn.<n>This transition from advisory roles to proactive execution challenges established legal, economic, and creative frameworks.<n>We explore challenges in three interrelated domains: creativity and intellectual property, legal and ethical considerations, and competitive effects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-01T03:14:59Z)

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.