The CASE Framework: A Multi-Disciplinary Control Architecture for Governing Enterprise Agentic AI

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.10153v1
• Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 19:10:31 GMT
• Title: The CASE Framework: A Multi-Disciplinary Control Architecture for Governing Enterprise Agentic AI
• Abstract summary: We argue that agentic AI governance is four problems, not one, each with a mature governing science.<n>We formalize each layer, derive cross-layer coupling conditions, and trace twenty-plus enterprise controls to their classical constructs.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Enterprises are deploying autonomous AI agents faster than they can govern them, and prevailing approaches stretch a single discipline, typically DevSecOps built for deterministic automation, across every scale of agency. We argue that agentic AI governance is four problems, not one, each with a mature governing science. The CASE framework assigns Control theory to the individual agent (intent as setpoint, guardrails as feedback, evaluation as observation), complex Adaptive systems theory to agent collectives (where emergence makes single-agent assurance non-compositional), Supervisory cybernetics to human-agent teams (where the Law of Requisite Variety shows unaided human oversight fails structurally), and Engineering operations to fleets (extending error budgets to decision quality so autonomy becomes a controlled variable). We formalize each layer, derive cross-layer coupling conditions, including a zero-touch deployment paradox where excellence at one-layer strains the others, and trace twenty-plus enterprise controls to their classical constructs. Three empirical studies validate the thesis: 82 percent of documented production agent failures are multi-layer trajectories; none of 22 ecosystem tools offers full Layer 2 (emergence) coverage; and all 35 scored public deployments fall in the lowest maturity band. We name this mismatch, risk realized at the emergence layer against capability barely offered and practice absent, the Emergence Gap. A five-level maturity model with a non-compensatory bottleneck-weighted index and assessment instrument operationalizes CASE as a scientific rather than process maturity model, grounded in production enterprise agentic platforms. As EU AI Act Article 14 makes effective human oversight a legal requirement, only architectures satisfying requisite variety can make oversight real rather than ceremonial.

Related papers

• A Few Pages of Markdown: Committed AI Configuration and Lower Quality Cost after Coding-Agent Adoption [33.31789388282026]
  Coding agents increase development velocity but also technical debt.<n>Prior work reports only average effects across adopters, hiding wide differences between teams.<n>We introduce RAMP, a four-level cumulative maturity model grounded in version-controlled artifacts that teams commit to configure AI tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-26T00:00:48Z)
• When Agents Evolve, Institutions Follow [52.359340707289114]
  We argue that multi-agent systems built on large language models face the same challenge.<n>Their central problem is not only individual intelligence, but collective organization.<n>We translate seven historical political institutions, spanning four canonical governance patterns, into executable multi-agent architectures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-30T10:30:58Z)
• 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)
• Governing the Agentic Enterprise: A Governance Maturity Model for Managing AI Agent Sprawl in Business Operations [0.0]
  Organizations face uncontrolled agent sprawl: the proliferation of redundant, ungoverned, and conflicting AI agents.<n>Despite growing acknowledgment of this challenge, academic literature lacks a formal, empirically validated governance maturity model.<n>This paper introduces the Agentic AI Governance Maturity Model (AAGMM), a five-level framework spanning 12 governance domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-13T14:35:14Z)
• Context Engineering: From Prompts to Corporate Multi-Agent Architecture [0.0]
  The paper proposes five context quality criteria: relevance, sufficiency, isolation, economy, and provenance, and frames context as the agent's operating system.<n>Intent engineering encodes organizational goals, values, and trade-off hierarchies into agent infrastructure.<n> Specification engineering creates a machine-readable corpus of corporate policies and standards enabling autonomous operation of multi-agent systems at scale.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-10T12:58:31Z)
• Towards a Science of Scaling Agent Systems [79.64446272302287]
  We formalize a definition for agent evaluation and characterize scaling laws as the interplay between agent quantity, coordination structure, modelic, and task properties.<n>We derive a predictive model using coordination metrics, that cross-validated R2=0, enabling prediction on unseen task domains.<n>We identify three effects: (1) a tool-coordination trade-off: under fixed computational budgets, tool-heavy tasks suffer disproportionately from multi-agent overhead, and (2) a capability saturation: coordination yields diminishing or negative returns once single-agent baselines exceed 45%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-09T06:52:21Z)
• LIMI: Less is More for Agency [49.63355240818081]
  LIMI (Less Is More for Intelligent Agency) demonstrates that agency follows radically different development principles.<n>We show that sophisticated agentic intelligence can emerge from minimal but strategically curated demonstrations of autonomous behavior.<n>Our findings establish the Agency Efficiency Principle: machine autonomy emerges not from data abundance but from strategic curation of high-quality agentic demonstrations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-22T10:59:32Z)
• Vulnerable Agent Identification in Large-Scale Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning [49.31650627835956]
  Partial agent failure becomes inevitable when systems scale up, making it crucial to identify the subset of agents whose compromise would most severely degrade overall performance.<n>In this paper, we study this Vulnerable Agent Identification (VAI) problem in large-scale multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL)<n> Experiments show our method effectively identifies more vulnerable agents in large-scale MARL and the rule-based system, fooling system into worse failures, and learning a value function that reveals the vulnerability of each agent.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-18T16:03:50Z)
• From MAS to MARS: Coordination Failures and Reasoning Trade-offs in Hierarchical Multi-Agent Robotic Systems within a Healthcare Scenario [3.5262044630932254]
  Multi-agent robotic systems (MARS) build upon multi-agent systems by integrating physical and task-related constraints.<n>Despite the availability of advanced multi-agent frameworks, their real-world deployment on robots remains limited.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-06T17:54:10Z)
• Personalized Constitutionally-Aligned Agentic Superego: Secure AI Behavior Aligned to Diverse Human Values [0.6640968473398455]
  Superego agent steers AI planning by referencing user-selected 'Creed Constitutions'<n>A real-time compliance enforcer validates plans against these constitutions.<n>System achieves up to a 98.3% harm score reduction and near-perfect refusal rates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-08T20:31:26Z)
• On the Resilience of LLM-Based Multi-Agent Collaboration with Faulty Agents [58.79302663733703]
  Large language model-based multi-agent systems have shown great abilities across various tasks due to the collaboration of expert agents.<n>The impact of clumsy or even malicious agents--those who frequently make errors in their tasks--on the overall performance of the system remains underexplored.<n>This paper investigates what is the resilience of various system structures under faulty agents on different downstream tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-02T03:25:20Z)

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.