The Context Access Divide: Interaction-Level Architecture as a Complementary Dimension of Agentic Inequality

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.08495v1
• Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2026 13:53:40 GMT
• Title: The Context Access Divide: Interaction-Level Architecture as a Complementary Dimension of Agentic Inequality
• Abstract summary: Two users with nominally equivalent AI access may experience qualitatively different AI utility.<n>For knowledge-intensive workers whose intellectual capital spans tens of thousands of files, the Context Access Divide (CAD) constitutes a qualitative threshold in AI usefulness.<n>We propose contextuality as a dimension of AI-mediated inequality that complements, but is not reducible to, the Sharp et al. framework.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Sharp et al. (2025) introduce "agentic inequality" as a framework for analyzing disparities in access to AI agents across three dimensions: availability, quality, and quantity. These person- and organization-level dimensions characterize who can access agents and at what capability, but do not address a structurally important divide operating at a finer level: the individual interaction. Two users with nominally equivalent agent access may experience qualitatively different AI utility depending on whether the system can autonomously retrieve context from the user's knowledge corpus (Dynamic Context Retrieval) or requires the user to manually identify and attach relevant documents at each query (Manual Attachment). We term this the Context Access Divide (CAD). For knowledge-intensive workers whose intellectual capital spans tens of thousands of files, the CAD constitutes a qualitative threshold in AI usefulness: below it, the cognitive burden of context curation falls on the human, reproducing the inefficiencies AI is meant to eliminate. We propose contextuality -- the degree to which an AI system autonomously accesses a user's accumulated knowledge capital -- as a dimension of AI-mediated inequality that complements, but is not reducible to, the Sharp et al. framework. We formalize the CAD with a probabilistic model grounded in the fan effect literature in cognitive psychology, demonstrating that manual context attachment leads to a combinatorial collapse in task-success probability as corpus size and task conjunctivity grow, while dynamic retrieval architectures are structurally insulated from this collapse. We analyze the technical basis of this divide in the Model Context Protocol (MCP) and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) architectures, and examine its implications for knowledge-work stratification and AI platform governance.

Related papers

• When Does AI Augment Work? A Workflow-Level Framework for Human-Agent Collaboration [78.16115745870405]
  We aim to characterise the value of artificial intelligence in the workplace.<n>Current studies largely measure this value in terms of the current automation capabilities and public adoption of AI.<n>To account for this, we must expand the scope of our analysis beyond atomised tasks of today.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-11T06:29:34Z)
• Using profiles of cognitive capability to assess AI suitability for workplace tasks [5.826026042207654]
  We introduce a pipeline that profiles agents and tasks using a shared set of core cognitive capabilities.<n>As both use a common set of cognitive dimensions, they can be updated independently as models and roles change.<n>We validate capability recovery on synthetic agents, profile six AI systems, and elicit task requirements from 410 employees.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-26T10:48:09Z)
• RAIL: An Automatic Classifier of the Artificial Intelligence Readiness Level [0.0]
  Assessing the maturity of artificial intelligence technologies is essential for investment decisions, project management, and policy monitoring.<n>The available readiness frameworks are heterogeneous and difficult to apply automatically.<n>This paper makes two contributions: first, we unify these three frameworks into the Unified AI Readiness Level (AIRL), a nine-level scale built on an environmental evidence ladder.<n>Second, we propose RAIL, a panel-of-experts classifier that operationalizes the scale.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-13T16:17:41Z)
• Hierarchical Compositionality for An Assistive AI Agent [9.152759278163954]
  AI agents are increasingly being developed to assist humans in various applications.<n>These methods are impressive predictors, but they are resource-hungry, opaque, and known to make arbitrary decisions in novel situations.<n>Our work seeks to explore the design of architectures for such AI agents based on core principles that can be traced back to the early pioneers of AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-11T00:17:56Z)
• From Prompts to Context: An Ontology-Driven Framework for Human-Generative AI Collaboration [26.702635306128865]
  This paper introduces an ontology-driven framework for representing Human-Generative AI collaboration.<n>Its core component, Contextual Collaboration AI Ontology, models key elements of collaboration as a shared machine-interpretable vocabulary.<n>We show how the framework can support the representation and documentation of collaboration episodes across requirements analysis, design, implementation, and testing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-28T09:35:59Z)
• Generative-AI and the transformation of workforce. A job postings-driven analysis [7.765662835417495]
  This paper investigates how generative-artificial intelligence AI is reshaping job requirements, skill compositions and sectoral dynamics across global labor markets.<n>It examines the evolving frequency and framing of AI-related competencies in job postings, exploring whether generative-AI functions primarily as an augmentative or substitutive force in the workplace.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-07T17:02:43Z)
• AI to Learn 2.0: A Deliverable-Oriented Governance Framework and Maturity Rubric for Opaque AI in Learning-Intensive Domains [0.0]
  Generative AI is entering research, education, and professional work faster than current governance frameworks can specify how AI-assisted outputs should be judged.<n>This paper proposes AI to Learn 2.0, a deliverable-oriented governance framework for AI-assisted work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-16T11:44:43Z)
• The AI Pyramid A Conceptual Framework for Workforce Capability in the Age of AI [2.134211474877041]
  Recent evidence shows that generative AI disproportionately affects highly educated, white collar work.<n>This paper proposes the AI Pyramid, a conceptual framework for organizing human capability in an AI mediated economy.<n>The framework has implications for organizations, education systems, and governments seeking to align learning, measurement, and policy with the evolving demands of AI mediated work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-10T09:27:56Z)
• From Accuracy to Impact: The Impact-Driven AI Framework (IDAIF) for Aligning Engineering Architecture with Theory of Change [0.40611352512781873]
  Impact-Driven AI Framework (IDAIF) is a novel architectural methodology that integrates Theory of Change (ToC) principles with modern artificial intelligence system design.<n>IDAIF addresses the gap by establishing a systematic mapping between ToC's five-stage model and corresponding AI architectural layers.<n>Three case studies demonstrate IDAIF application across healthcare, cybersecurity, and software engineering domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-09T10:21:02Z)
• A Survey of Frontiers in LLM Reasoning: Inference Scaling, Learning to Reason, and Agentic Systems [93.8285345915925]
  Reasoning is a fundamental cognitive process that enables logical inference, problem-solving, and decision-making.<n>With the rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs), reasoning has emerged as a key capability that distinguishes advanced AI systems.<n>We categorize existing methods along two dimensions: (1) Regimes, which define the stage at which reasoning is achieved; and (2) Architectures, which determine the components involved in the reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-12T01:27:49Z)
• Converging Paradigms: The Synergy of Symbolic and Connectionist AI in LLM-Empowered Autonomous Agents [55.63497537202751]
  Article explores the convergence of connectionist and symbolic artificial intelligence (AI) Traditionally, connectionist AI focuses on neural networks, while symbolic AI emphasizes symbolic representation and logic. Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) highlight the potential of connectionist architectures in handling human language as a form of symbols.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-11T14:00:53Z)
• Human-Centric Multimodal Machine Learning: Recent Advances and Testbed on AI-based Recruitment [66.91538273487379]
  There is a certain consensus about the need to develop AI applications with a Human-Centric approach. Human-Centric Machine Learning needs to be developed based on four main requirements: (i) utility and social good; (ii) privacy and data ownership; (iii) transparency and accountability; and (iv) fairness in AI-driven decision-making processes. We study how current multimodal algorithms based on heterogeneous sources of information are affected by sensitive elements and inner biases in the data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-13T16:44:44Z)
• Towards an Interface Description Template for AI-enabled Systems [77.34726150561087]
  Reuse is a common system architecture approach that seeks to instantiate a system architecture with existing components. There is currently no framework that guides the selection of necessary information to assess their portability to operate in a system different than the one for which the component was originally purposed. We present ongoing work on establishing an interface description template that captures the main information of an AI-enabled component.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-13T20:30:26Z)
• A general framework for scientifically inspired explanations in AI [76.48625630211943]
  We instantiate the concept of structure of scientific explanation as the theoretical underpinning for a general framework in which explanations for AI systems can be implemented. This framework aims to provide the tools to build a "mental-model" of any AI system so that the interaction with the user can provide information on demand and be closer to the nature of human-made explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-02T10:32:21Z)

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.