Governance at the Boundary: How Agent Decomposition Degrades Policy Compliance
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.16055v1
- Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 03:31:59 GMT
- Title: Governance at the Boundary: How Agent Decomposition Degrades Policy Compliance
- Abstract summary: We introduce Fiducia-bench, a benchmark for the governability of financial agents.<n>We use it to study a question no prior benchmark addresses: does an agent degrade its governance?<n>Policy-relevant facts discovered by one component are attenuated at the handoff boundary before reaching the component that must act on them.
- Score: 6.411104724993454
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Existing agent benchmarks ask whether the agent finished the task. We ask whether it finished it within policy. We introduce Fiducia-bench, a benchmark for the governability of financial agents---whether they escalate when obligated, abstain when required, and leave an auditable trail---and use it to study a question no prior benchmark addresses: does decomposing an agent into components degrade its governance? It does, and the mechanism is specific. Policy-relevant facts discovered by one component are attenuated at the handoff boundary before reaching the component that must act on them. In a 626-episode experiment across 100 KYC/AML task variants, two models, and three architectures, a 32B open-weights model attenuated 0% of discovered facts under a single-loop baseline, 56% under a fixed pipeline, and 85% under an orchestrator-subagent architecture (all at constraint distance 2). A stronger model (gpt-4.1-mini) attenuated 3-6% under the same conditions, suggesting the governance cost of decomposition is partly a function of model capability. Critically, the same mechanism produces both under-escalation and over-escalation, depending on whether the dropped fact was a risk signal or an exculpating one. The benchmark, all tasks, and the verification harness are open-source
Related papers
- BenchShield: Formal Model-Backed Instrumentation for Reward Integrity in LLM-Agent Evaluation Infrastructure [47.61632934139226]
LM-agent benchmarks increasingly function as interactive evaluation infrastructure.<n>This interactivity makes evaluations vulnerable to reward hacking.<n>This paper presents BenchShield, a model-backed instrumentation layer for reward integrity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-09-10T03:10:58Z) - Governing Agentic AI in FinTech [3.731168012111834]
Financial institutions are delegating consequential decisions to agentic AI systems.<n>We argue the binding governance constraint is not capability but verifiability.<n>We develop a multilevel governance theory for agentic AI.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-11T18:52:09Z) - Causal Agent Replay: Counterfactual Attribution for LLM-Agent Failures [0.0]
Causal Agent Replay (CAR) models an agent run as a structural causal model.<n>It applies a do-operation to a step, and re-executes a trajectory forward under the same policy.<n>CAR is open source and runs on hosted or free local models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-06T17:44:23Z) - RepoMirage: Probing Repository Context Reasoning in Code Agents with Perturbations [51.43574078961796]
We introduce RepoMirage, a two-stage evaluation suite built on SWE-Bench Verified.<n>RepoMirage-Perturb applies three types of semantics-preserving repository-level perturbations, revealing a clear performance drop when correct solving requires broader context access.<n>We propose RepoAnchor, a structure-first prototype workflow that separates repository exploration from downstream problem solving.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-25T06:26:43Z) - PBT-Bench: Benchmarking AI Agents on Property-Based Testing [29.035258104995204]
We introduce PBT-Bench, a benchmark of 100 curated property-based testing problems across 40 real Python libraries.<n>Each problem injects one or more semantic bugs (365 in total, mean 3.65 per problem) designed so that default-strategy random inputs almost never trigger them.<n>Bug recall under the PBT-guided prompt ranges from 42.1% to 83.4% across models; under the open-ended baseline, from 31.4% to 76.7%.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-13T18:01:05Z) - 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) - From Agent Failure Paths to Quantified Residual Risk: A Compositional Framework for Resilient Agentic AI [8.947753534117298]
Agentic AI is crossing trust boundaries faster than current risk models can represent.<n>We propose a mechanism-to-magnitude pipeline for resilient agentic and embodied AI.<n>We show the framework on two contrasting scenarios a real-time warehouse robot and a governance-instrumented financial-services agent.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-28T23:40:24Z) - Harness as an Asset: Enforcing Determinism via the Convergent AI Agent Framework (CAAF) [0.0]
Large Language Models produce a controllability gap in safety-critical engineering.<n>We introduce the Convergent AI Agent Framework (CAAF), which transitions agentic from open-loop generation to closed-loop fail-safe determinism.<n>CAAF's three pillars address complementary failure surfaces and none alone closes the controllability gap at commodity cost.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-18T15:15:09Z) - Dynamic analysis enhances issue resolution [53.50448142467294]
DAIRA (Dynamic Analysis-enhanced Issue Resolution Agent) is an automated repair framework that embeds dynamic analysis into the agent's reasoning cycle.<n> Driven by a Test Tracing-Driven methodology, DAIRA utilizes lightweight monitors to extract critical runtime data.<n>When powered by Gemini 3 Flash Preview, DAIRA establishes a new state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance, achieving a 79.4% resolution rate on the SWE-bench Verified dataset.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-23T14:48:54Z) - 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) - 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.