Strategic Decision Support for AI Agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.12587v1
• Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2026 18:34:36 GMT
• Title: Strategic Decision Support for AI Agents
• Abstract summary: In modern agentic systems, AI agents act on behalf of users, while humans and tools become support mechanisms around them.<n>This role reversal brings reliability concerns to the forefront, since agentic errors can be consequential.<n>We propose a framework for strategic decision support for AI agents through an optimization problem that minimizes support usage.
• Score: 26.38833436936642
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Traditionally, decision support studies how humans use machine learning models to make better decisions. In modern agentic systems, this division of roles is increasingly reversed: AI agents act on behalf of users, while humans and tools becomes support mechanisms around them. This role reversal brings reliability concerns to the forefront, since agentic errors can be consequential and agent behavior must remain aligned with human goals and constraints. Departing from the classical view of decision support, we revisit its two basic principles, the cost--value tradeoff of seeking support and the role of uncertainty quantification, in a setting where AI agents are the central actors. We propose a framework for strategic decision support for AI agents through an optimization problem that minimizes support usage subject to controlling a counterfactual missed-support error: the probability that the agent acts alone on instances where support would have materially improved its output. At the population level, we show that the optimal policy is a threshold rule on the value of support. Building on this structure, we develop an online algorithm that adaptively thresholds such a score and uses randomized exploration to control missed-support error without distributional assumptions. We further introduce a calibration-on-the-fly method that reduces unnecessary support calls online. We instantiate this framework across diverse scenarios, including information gathering, human--AI collaboration, and tool use, showing how each can be modeled through the same strategic decision-support lens. Experiments across these settings show that our method reliably controls the target error while substantially reducing support usage in practice.

Related papers

• ComBodied Agents: a New Paradigm of Human-Centric Agentic AI [121.60938707072069]
  We introduce Combodied Agents, a human-centered paradigm that perceives, models, predicts, and supports individual human-state trajectories over time.<n>We unify fragmented capabilities across personal assistants, health agents, AI companions, and adaptive human--AI systems into a closed loop.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-11T13:35:58Z)
• Criticality-Based Guard Rail Validation for AI Agent Decisions in Autonomous Telecom Networks [0.0]
  Guard Rail Validation (GRV) is a standardizable runtime architecture for intercepting and validating AI-driven decisions before execution.<n>We present the architecture, algorithmic procedures, O-RAN deployment model, and evaluate threat coverage against known AI/ML attacks in telecommunications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-02T14:21:26Z)
• Reliability and Effectiveness of Autonomous AI Agents in Supply Chain Management [15.19525853427301]
  This paper studies autonomous generative AI agents in multi-echelon supply chains using the MIT Beer Game.<n>We identify four inference-time levers that shape performance: model selection, policies and guardrails, centralized data sharing, and prompt engineering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-16T15:11:35Z)
• A Case-Driven Multi-Agent Framework for E-Commerce Search Relevance [0.0]
  Relevance is a foundation of user experience in e-commerce search.<n>We propose a case-driven multi-agent framework that automates the pipeline from bad-case identification to resolution.<n>We show that the framework performs relevance-related tasks effectively, improves annotation accuracy, and enables more timely and generalizable bad-case resolution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-07T10:41:50Z)
• Position: agentic AI orchestration should be Bayes-consistent [92.04373485710285]
  This paper argues that coherent decision-making requires Bayesian principles at the orchestration level of the agentic system.<n>It provides examples and design patterns to illustrate how beliefs and utility-aware policies can improve agentic AI orchestration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-01T15:43:43Z)
• 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)
• When Should a Robot Think? Resource-Aware Reasoning via Reinforcement Learning for Embodied Robotic Decision-Making [68.12864562049957]
  Embodied robotic systems increasingly rely on large language model (LLM)-based agents to support high-level reasoning.<n>This raises a fundamental question for embodied agents: when should the agent reason, and when should it act?<n>We propose RARRL (Resource-Aware Reasoning via Reinforcement Learning), a hierarchical framework for resource-aware orchestration of embodied agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-17T15:38:50Z)
• 2-Step Agent: A Framework for the Interaction of a Decision Maker with AI Decision Support [0.254890465057467]
  We introduce a general computational framework, the 2-Step Agent, which models the effects of AI-assisted decision making.<n>Our results reveal several potential pitfalls of AI-driven decision support and highlight the need for thorough model documentation and proper user training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-25T13:11:12Z)
• HumanAgencyBench: Scalable Evaluation of Human Agency Support in AI Assistants [5.4831302830611195]
  We develop the idea of human agency by integrating philosophical and scientific theories of agency with AI-assisted evaluation methods.<n>We develop HumanBench (HAB), a scalable and adaptive benchmark with six dimensions of human agency based on typical AI use cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-10T11:10:10Z)
• The Cost of Dynamic Reasoning: Demystifying AI Agents and Test-Time Scaling from an AI Infrastructure Perspective [3.0868637098088403]
  Large-language-model (LLM)-based AI agents have recently showcased impressive versatility by employing dynamic reasoning.<n>This paper presents the first comprehensive system-level analysis of AI agents, quantifying their resource usage, latency behavior, energy consumption, and test-time scaling strategies.<n>Our findings reveal that while agents improve accuracy with increased compute, they suffer from rapidly diminishing returns, widening latency variance, and unsustainable infrastructure costs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-04T14:37:54Z)
• Combining AI Control Systems and Human Decision Support via Robustness and Criticality [53.10194953873209]
  We extend a methodology for adversarial explanations (AE) to state-of-the-art reinforcement learning frameworks. We show that the learned AI control system demonstrates robustness against adversarial tampering. In a training / learning framework, this technology can improve both the AI's decisions and explanations through human interaction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-03T15:38:57Z)
• Online Decision Mediation [72.80902932543474]
  Consider learning a decision support assistant to serve as an intermediary between (oracle) expert behavior and (imperfect) human behavior. In clinical diagnosis, fully-autonomous machine behavior is often beyond ethical affordances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T05:59:43Z)

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.