Agentic AutoResearch forSpace Autonomy: An Auditable, LLM-Driven Research Agent for Aerospace Control Problems

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.20394v1
• Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2026 15:48:25 GMT
• Title: Agentic AutoResearch forSpace Autonomy: An Auditable, LLM-Driven Research Agent for Aerospace Control Problems
• Abstract summary: AutoResearch is a framework in which a large language model autonomously drives a loop for aerospace control problems.<n>No reported result is credited until it passes three checks: measured per-problem seed noise, reseeded verification of the best configuration, and leave-one-out pruning of the agent's edits.
• Score: 2.258690092379457
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Spacecraft guidance, navigation, and control functions are increasingly realized as learned policies distilled from expert solvers. Developing such a policy is itself a research process: an investigator selects an architecture and hyperparameters, runs experiments, and must determine whether an apparent improvement is genuine or merely seed noise. This paper presents AutoResearch, a framework in which a large language model autonomously drives that loop for aerospace control problems, coupled with a credibility layer, built into the loop, that certifies each reported result against the problem's own measured seed noise. The language model serves only as the offline research agent that develops the control policy; the trained policy it produces is then deployed onboard the spacecraft, while the model itself never operates the vehicle. At each iteration the agent reads a plain-language problem description and the run history, proposes a single edit to the training script, executes it, and logs the outcome. No reported result is credited until it passes the same three checks: measured per-problem seed noise, reseeded verification of the best configuration, and leave-one-out pruning of the agent's edits. The same loop is applied, unchanged, to two aerospace control problems: a Clohessy-Wiltshire relative rendezvous and a safety-constrained collision-avoidance docking past a keep-out zone, each calibrated against a known optimal control benchmark. In both, the audited policy clears the measured seed noise by many standard deviations; an undirected search over the same parameters does not. On the docking problem the gap becomes categorical: undirected search yields no feasible policy, while the learned policy stays outside the keep-out zone on every seed.

Related papers

• AtumAI: A Principled Framework for Agentic Generation of Datacenter Control-Plane Policies [9.93200224309013]
  We introduce AtumAI, a framework that generates control-plane policies with agentic AI.<n>AtumAI autonomously proposes, tests, and refines candidate policies until one satisfies the request.<n>It consistently outperforms expert-engineered baselines on three control-plane tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T17:45:58Z)
• Self-Authored Verification Is Unreliable in Heuristic Self-Improving Agents [5.91817208489443]
  We study the verifier-acceptance-deployment gap.<n>This gap refers to the discrepancy between an agent's self-authored verification signal and a sealed deployment evaluation.<n>We introduce a Sealed Exogenous Acceptance Loop (SEAL)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-27T11:45:14Z)
• Falsifiable Release Gates for Self-Improving Systems [0.0]
  We describe falsifiable release gates, and a methodology to build and validate such systems.<n>Every new capability must pass a pre-specified, machine-verifiable acceptance suite before it ships.<n>No action goes to an effector without a safety-critical property capability token minted by a control ring.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-11T06:06:34Z)
• AutoCedar: An Agentic Framework for Verifier-Guided Access Control Policy Synthesis [0.2449909275410288]
  AutoCedar is a verifier-guided system that turns natural-language access-control requirements into a reviewed, checkable target.<n>It then synthesizes Cedar policies against that target.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-04T01:13:32Z)
• ToolChain-CRC: Conformal Risk Control for Agentic AI Under Retrieval and Tool-Use Drift [0.0]
  We propose ToolChain-CRC, a conformal risk-control method for retrieval-augmented and tool-using agents under drift.<n>The method treats each agent run as a full trajectory of actions, observations, and final output.<n>It builds step-level risk scores, combines them into a trajectory risk score, calibrates an accept-or-intervene rule, and adds an anytime alarm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-16T20:27:37Z)
• Can Generalist Agents Automate Data Curation? [58.652262227632406]
  Curating training data is among the most consequential yet labor-intensive parts of modern AI development.<n>We ask whether generalist coding agents can automate this data-curation loop.<n>We introduce *Curation-Bench*, an agent-centric benchmark that fixes the model, training recipe, and evaluation suite.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-02T22:26:53Z)
• Where Do Deep-Research Agents Go Wrong? Span-Level Error Localization in Agent Trajectories [51.22051230894794]
  Evaluation based on final answers shows whether an agent succeeds, but not which parts of the trajectory make the answer unreliable.<n>We collect 2,790 real trajectories from two agent frameworks, three backbone models, and three benchmarks, convert raw logs into semantic spans, and annotate harmful error spans through expert review.<n>We propose DRIFT, a claim-centric auditing framework that tracks agent claims, checks their support in trajectory evidence, and marks spans where unsupported or conflicting claims affect the answer path.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-01T10:50:26Z)
• 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)
• A measurement substrate for agentic Kubernetes operations: Methodology and a case study in retrieval-compounding falsification [0.0]
  Empirical claims about autonomous operations agents are largely unfalsifiable.<n>Code agents have a verification substrate that turns "did it work" into a fast, falsifiable, groundtruth signal.<n>We present agent-breakage, a closed-loop measurement framework that injects faults into a target cluster.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-21T21:47:52Z)
• To Search or Not to Search: Aligning the Decision Boundary of Deep Search Agents via Causal Intervention [61.82680155643223]
  We identify the root cause of misaligned decision boundaries, the threshold determining when accumulated information suffices to answer.<n>This causes over-search (redundant searching despite sufficient knowledge) and under-search (premature termination yielding incorrect answers.<n>We propose a comprehensive framework comprising two key components. First, we introduce causal intervention-based diagnosis that identifies boundary errors.<n>Second, we develop Decision Boundary Alignment for Deep Search agents (DAS)<n>Our DAS method effectively calibrates these boundaries, mitigating both over-search and under-search to achieve substantial gains in accuracy and efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T09:29:06Z)
• Towards Policy-Compliant Agents: Learning Efficient Guardrails For Policy Violation Detection [25.53228630260007]
  PolicyGuardBench is a benchmark of about 60k examples for detecting policy violations in agent trajectories.<n>PolicyGuard-4B is a lightweight guardrail model that delivers strong detection accuracy across all tasks.<n>Together, PolicyGuardBench and PolicyGuard-4B provide the first comprehensive framework for studying policy compliance in web agent trajectories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-03T20:03:19Z)
• Autonomous UAV Flight Navigation in Confined Spaces: A Reinforcement Learning Approach [0.6533458718563319]
  Off-policy methods promise high sample efficiency, a vital trait for minimizing costly and unsafe real-world fine-tuning.<n>On-policy methods often exhibit greater training stability, which is essential for reliable convergence in hazard-dense environments.<n>This work provides evidence that for high-precision, safety-critical navigation tasks, the reliable convergence of a well-established on-policy method can be more decisive than the nominal sample efficiency of an off-policy algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-22T21:29:59Z)
• Latent Exploration for Reinforcement Learning [87.42776741119653]
  In Reinforcement Learning, agents learn policies by exploring and interacting with the environment. We propose LATent TIme-Correlated Exploration (Lattice), a method to inject temporally-correlated noise into the latent state of the policy network.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T17:40:43Z)
• Can Agents Run Relay Race with Strangers? Generalization of RL to Out-of-Distribution Trajectories [88.08381083207449]
  We show the prevalence of emphgeneralization failure on controllable states from stranger agents. We propose a novel method called Self-Trajectory Augmentation (STA), which will reset the environment to the agent's old states according to the Q function during training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-26T10:12:12Z)
• Asynchronous Multi Agent Active Search [6.587280549237275]
  We propose two distinct active search algorithms called SPATS (Sparse Parallel Asynchronous Thompson Sampling) and LATSI (LAplace Thompson Sampling with Information gain) We consider that targets are sparsely located around the environment in keeping with compressive sensing assumptions. We provide simulation results as well as theoretical analysis to demonstrate the efficacy of our proposed algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-25T22:17:20Z)

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.