From Runtime Records to Legal Findings: An Evidentiary-Adequacy Criterion for Agentic AI Oversight

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.00941v1
• Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2026 13:41:23 GMT
• Title: From Runtime Records to Legal Findings: An Evidentiary-Adequacy Criterion for Agentic AI Oversight
• Abstract summary: Report defines an evidentiary-adequacy criterion for a bounded class of determinations.<n>It instantiates the criterion against selected EU AI Act oversight obligations.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Agentic AI systems generate runtime records, logs, traces, and audit artefacts, but the existence or integrity of such records does not by itself establish that legally operative oversight findings can be recovered from them. This technical report defines an evidentiary-adequacy criterion for a bounded class of determinations: binary findings of fact about specific events and their relations, such as whether protected data crossed a boundary, whether a human could intervene, whether an information barrier held, or whether delegated authority was valid at the moment of use. The criterion states that a runtime record can answer such a determination only if it carries both a typing that maps recorded events to the legally operative category and the relation, such as provenance, authority, derivation, or temporal validity, on which the determination's truth depends. The claim is one of necessity, not sufficiency. The report instantiates the criterion against selected EU AI Act oversight obligations and explains why tamper-proof logs, generic process frameworks, and provenance structures alone cannot establish the relevant findings. It further relates the argument to requisite variety, the Good Regulator Theorem, and the trace-versus-hyperproperty boundary of runtime verification. Companion materials and the experiment protocol are archived on Zenodo.

Related papers

• From Intent to Execution Grant: An Execution-Boundary Conformance Profile for High-Risk AI Actions [9.27474112226667]
  EBL-Core decides whether one canonical, fully materialized AI-generated candidate may receive action-scoped execution authority under explicit conditions.<n>It binds, policy non-weakening, evidence handling, deterministic adjudication, verification, and grant lifecycle behavior.<n>Across 100 trials, 32 concurrent Redemption attempts yielded exactly one successful Redemption and protected test effect per trial.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-10T14:21:45Z)
• An Evidence Model for Agentic Processes: Evidence Claims, Trust Assumptions, and Policy Assessment [0.0]
  This paper proposes an evidence claim model for agentic processes.<n>It distinguishes artifact integrity, temporal existence, provenance, approval evidence, declared ordering, capture claim, relevance claim, deliberation traceability, monitoring claim, anchoring authorization claim, policy assessment claim, risk treatment claim, mitigation implementation claim, and management response claim.<n>The model maps these claims to mechanisms, assumptions, limitations, and threats, and situates them in an agent organization with functional CEO agent, executive, operational, evidence, and audit roles, plus a plan-do-check-act-inspired management response loop.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-08T09:25:28Z)
• VeriPhy: Agentic Physical Reasoning for World Model Evaluation and Refinement [57.86962208273888]
  We present an auditable physical-verification system in which a text-only planner compiles the prompt into typed physical obligations.<n>Each action returns a provenance-carrying evidence record whose payload, when usable, is either a typed measurement or an explicitly tagged learned state.<n>We anchor evaluation in a 1,500-clip corpus of human-annotated flaw records that localize real generation failures in prompt reference, space, and time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-02T20:36:45Z)
• Validity, Reliability, and Transparency in Artificial Intelligence Regulation [2.588958866512272]
  Article argues that modern AI raises concerns of construct validity, confounding, representativeness, distribution shift, and fairness trade-offs.<n>We argue that inference should function as a precondition for proportionality assessment and deployment approval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-06T09:36:15Z)
• 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)
• Beyond Probabilistic Similarity: Structural, Temporal, and Causal Limitations of Retrieval-Augmented Generation in the Legal Domain [0.0]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation has become a standard architectural response to unreliability in legal AI.<n>We argue that these failures are symptoms of an architectural mismatch between probabilistic retrieval and the hierarchical, temporal, and institutional structure of legal knowledge.<n>We develop the argument in three moves. First, we articulate the ontological commitment of legal knowledge as a triad of properties derivable from classical legal theory.<n>Second, we identify three corresponding pathologies of retrieval (mereological blindness, diachronic blindness, and causal opacity), each developed with an operational definition, a failure mechanism, a canonical example, and detection criteria for
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-08T16:46:53Z)
• Monitoring Data-aware Temporal Properties (Extended Version) [56.386411908764494]
  We consider anticipatory monitoring of linear-time properties enriched with an arbitrary SMT theory over finite traces.<n>Anticipatory monitoring in this setting is highly challenging, as the monitoring state depends on both the trace prefix seen so far and all its possible finite continuations.<n>We present and formally prove the correctness of a novel foundational framework for monitoring properties in an expressive fragment offMT.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-14T10:23:11Z)
• Designing escalation criteria for international AI incident response: criteria, triggers, and thresholds [0.0]
  No operational criteria exist for determining when a detected AI incident warrants escalation beyond national handling to international coordination.<n>This paper proposes an escalation framework to address this gap, intended as a common reference point across jurisdictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-25T07:31:58Z)
• Beyond Task Success: An Evidence-Synthesis Framework for Evaluating, Governing, and Orchestrating Agentic AI [0.0]
  This paper contributes a bounded evidence synthesis across a manually coded corpus of twenty-four recent sources.<n>The paper introduces three linked artifacts: (1) a four-layer framework spanning evaluation, governance, orchestration, and assurance; (2) an ODTA runtime-placement test based on observability, decidability, timeliness, and attestability; and (3) a minimum action-evidence bundle for state-changing actions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-18T20:28:26Z)
• Compliance-by-Construction Argument Graphs: Using Generative AI to Produce Evidence-Linked Formal Arguments for Certification-Grade Accountability [0.0]
  This paper proposes a compliance-by-construction architecture that integrates Generative AI (GenAI) with structured formal argument representations.<n>The architecture treats each AI-assisted step as a claim that must be supported by verifiable evidence and validated against explicit reasoning constraints.<n>The analysis suggests that validation rules can prevent unsupported claims from entering the decision record while allowing GenAI to accelerate argument construction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-05T12:55:16Z)
• From Fluent to Verifiable: Claim-Level Auditability for Deep Research Agents [8.49451413641847]
  We argue that as research generation becomes cheap, auditability becomes the bottleneck.<n>This perspective proposes claim-level auditability as a first-class design and evaluation target for deep research agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-14T19:39:15Z)
• 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)
• Deriving Character Logic from Storyline as Codified Decision Trees [67.01182739162142]
  Role-playing (RP) agents rely on behavioral profiles to act consistently across diverse narrative contexts.<n>We propose Codified Decision Trees (CDT), a data-driven framework that induces an executable and interpretable decision structure from large-scale narrative data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-15T05:12:43Z)
• GERE: Generative Evidence Retrieval for Fact Verification [57.78768817972026]
  We propose GERE, the first system that retrieves evidences in a generative fashion. The experimental results on the FEVER dataset show that GERE achieves significant improvements over the state-of-the-art baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-12T03:49:35Z)
• Nested Counterfactual Identification from Arbitrary Surrogate Experiments [95.48089725859298]
  We study the identification of nested counterfactuals from an arbitrary combination of observations and experiments. Specifically, we prove the counterfactual unnesting theorem (CUT), which allows one to map arbitrary nested counterfactuals to unnested ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-07T12:51:04Z)

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.