pAI-Econ-claude: A Gated Human-in-the-Loop Multi-Agent Architecture for AI-Assisted Economic Theory Development

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.21268v1
• Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 12:40:47 GMT
• Title: pAI-Econ-claude: A Gated Human-in-the-Loop Multi-Agent Architecture for AI-Assisted Economic Theory Development
• Abstract summary: pAI-Econ-claude is a gated, human-in-the-loop multi-agent architecture for AI-assisted economic theory development.<n>Agents coordinate through a shared workspace of inspectable intermediate records.<n> specialized gates diagnose targeted failure modes and recommend loopbacks without certifying correctness.
• Score: 15.442870614597451
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In many social-science research tasks, such as economics, LLM-based agents must produce outputs for which no cheap, task-complete, machine-readable correctness signal exists. This creates a distinctive reliability problem for multi-agent systems: how should generation, critique, coordination, and human judgment be organized when no component can certify the final result? We address this problem through pAI-Econ-claude, a gated, human-in-the-loop multi-agent architecture for AI-assisted economic theory development. Agents coordinate through a shared workspace of inspectable intermediate records; specialized gates diagnose targeted failure modes and recommend loopbacks without certifying correctness; and human checkpoints retain authority over decisions that are costly to reverse. We evaluate the architecture on five matched economic-theory tasks against an ungated baseline. Two evaluators blinded to configuration agreed on all five pairwise rankings, preferring the gated architecture in four tasks and the baseline in one. Mean failure severity fell from 1.58 to 1.16, while overall usefulness rose from 2.60 to 3.10. The largest observed gain occurred when a reality check rejected a false market-structure premise and a proof review prompted revision of a false welfare claim. The negative case shows that scaffolding can also compress an economically important mechanism too aggressively. The results support a bounded claim: gated oversight improves the auditability of AI-assisted economic theory without substituting for formal verification, and the allocation of irreversible human judgment is a more informative design variable than pure agent autonomy. The workflow is publicly available at https://github.com/maxwell2732/pAI-Econ-claude.

Related papers

• Grounded Scaling: Why Agentic AI Needs Deterministic Environments [12.666642977162468]
  Long-chain agent execution fails exponentially in environments designed for human tolerance.<n>We operationalise the framework as a Supply Certainty Index (SCI) over five measurable properties.<n>We engage three competing positions: sim-to-real sufficiency, alignment sufficiency, and AI-as-normal-technology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-21T13:34:18Z)
• TRUST: A Framework for Decentralized AI Service v.0.1 [47.384270414446604]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) and Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) in high-stakes domains demand reliable verification.<n>We introduce TRUST (Transparent, Robust, and Unified Services for Trustworthy AI), a decentralized framework with three innovations.<n>We prove a Safety-Profitability Theorem ensuring honest auditors profit while malicious actors incur losses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-29T19:32:58Z)
• IMPACT-CYCLE: A Contract-Based Multi-Agent System for Claim-Level Supervisory Correction of Long-Video Semantic Memory [73.22944697933603]
  Existing pipelines produce opaque, end-to-end outputs that expose no intermediate state for inspection.<n>We present IMPACT-Cycle, a supervisory multi-agent system that reformulates long-video understanding as a multimodal iterative claim-level maintenance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-22T03:03:33Z)
• 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)
• OOM-RL: Out-of-Money Reinforcement Learning Market-Driven Alignment for LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems [4.970665847294818]
  We introduce an objective alignment paradigm: textbfOut-of-Money Reinforcement Learning (OOM-RL).<n>Our study chronicles the system's evolution from a high-turnover, sycophantic baseline to a robust, liquidity-aware architecture.<n>We conclude that substituting subjective human preference with rigorous economic penalties provides a robust methodology for aligning autonomous agents in high-stakes, real-world environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-13T13:45:42Z)
• The Novelty Bottleneck: A Framework for Understanding Human Effort Scaling in AI-Assisted Work [4.726153739634646]
  We propose a model of human-AI collaboration that isolates a mechanism we call the novelty bottleneck.<n>The model assumes that tasks decompose into atomic decisions, a fraction $$ of which are "novel"<n>Our contribution is not a proof that human effort must scale linearly, but a framework that identifies the novelty fraction as the key parameter governing AI-assisted productivity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-28T22:50:13Z)
• Automated Self-Testing as a Quality Gate: Evidence-Driven Release Management for LLM Applications [51.56484100374058]
  We present an automated self-testing framework that introduces quality gates with evidence-based release decisions.<n>We evaluate the framework through a longitudinal case study of an internally deployed multi-agent conversational AI system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-13T20:44:15Z)
• Making LLMs Reliable When It Matters Most: A Five-Layer Architecture for High-Stakes Decisions [51.56484100374058]
  Current large language models (LLMs) excel in verifiable domains where outputs can be checked before action but prove less reliable for high-stakes strategic decisions with uncertain outcomes.<n>This gap, driven by mutually cognitive biases in both humans and artificial intelligence (AI) systems, threatens the defensibility of valuations and sustainability of investments in the sector.<n>This report describes a framework emerging from systematic qualitative assessment across 7 frontier-grade LLMs and 3 market-facing venture vignettes under time pressure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-10T22:24:21Z)
• Structured Debate Improves Corporate Credit Reasoning in Financial AI [6.013710554725173]
  This study develops and evaluates two operational large language model (LLM)-based systems to generate structured reasoning from non-financial evidence.<n>The first is a non-adrial single-agent system (NAS) that produces bidirectional analysis through a single-pass reasoning pipeline.<n>The second is a debate-based multi-agent system (KPD-MADS) that operationalizes adversarial verification through a ten-step structured interaction protocol.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-20T02:50:03Z)
• Eigen-1: Adaptive Multi-Agent Refinement with Monitor-Based RAG for Scientific Reasoning [53.45095336430027]
  We develop a unified framework that combines implicit retrieval and structured collaboration.<n>On Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) Bio/Chem Gold, our framework achieves 48.3% accuracy.<n>Results on SuperGPQA and TRQA confirm robustness across domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T14:05:55Z)

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.