Proactive Service Agents: A Unified Decision Framework, Methods, and Evaluation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.03727v1
• Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2026 12:00:34 GMT
• Title: Proactive Service Agents: A Unified Decision Framework, Methods, and Evaluation
• Abstract summary: Large language model agents can plan, invoke tools, and modify external states, yet most systems still take an explicit user instruction as a fixed starting point.<n>This survey gives an operational definition centered on initiative and formulates the problem as a partially observable sequential decision process constrained by authorization and risk.
• Score: 6.657978673347863
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language model agents can plan, invoke tools, and modify external states, yet most systems still take an explicit user instruction as a fixed starting point. Proactive service moves the decision upstream: an agent must infer service opportunities from incomplete environmental and user signals, choose among remaining silent, asking, assisting, and acting, and account for interruption, misunderstanding, overreach, and privacy costs. This survey gives an operational definition centered on initiative and formulates the problem as a partially observable sequential decision process constrained by authorization and risk. The formulation represents timing, content, and delivery within one structured action, while making explicit the option value of waiting, the decision value of questions, and feedback-induced state changes. On this basis, we organize existing methods along one decision pipeline (state and need estimation, intervention gating, action construction, and feedback adaptation) and describe prescribed, predictive, model based, and return optimizing mechanisms as nonexclusive policy-construction components. We further normalize decision units and three-axis evidence descriptors across streaming dialogue, screen, video, software-engineering, and human-agent collaboration resources, and formalize metrics for triggering, timing, calibration, user burden, safety, and policy value. The synthesis shows why offline classification performance alone does not predict deployment benefit and why long-term memory is not a defining condition of proactivity. Reliable proactive service instead requires calibrated incremental intervention value, verifiable authorization, recoverable execution, and counterfactual evidence.

Related papers

• When Intelligence Becomes Agency: A Theory of Governed, Proactive Agency for Symbiotic AI Systems [0.0]
  Persistent AI assistants are intended to extend human attention, memory, and coordination across changing digital and physical environments.<n>They must decide on their own whether a situation warrants behavior at all, when it does and in what mode.<n>This paper develops a conceptual and formal framework for governed proactive agency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-07T16:46:38Z)
• Decision Making Needs Uncertainty Quantification [Lecture Notes] [35.36148913066079]
  This lecture note develops, from first principles and within a single decision-theoretic setting, the link between the objective and the knowledge of an agent.<n>We show that a risk-neutral agent needs the posterior distribution over the state, whereas a risk-averse agent can rely without loss of optimality on a prediction set and a worst-case decision rule.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-15T22:50:26Z)
• SovereignPA-Bench: Evaluating User-Owned Personal Agents under Evolving Intent, Platform Mediation, and Consent Constraints [0.0]
  SovereignPA-Bench is an executable benchmark for evaluating user-owned personal agents.<n>We evaluate 120 sovereignty stress scenarios across 4 model families and 8 policy baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-06T17:39:05Z)
• Autonomous Information Seeking: A Roadmap for Agentic Recommender Systems [64.88044474617854]
  The rapid integration of large language model-based agents into recommender systems has driven a shift from static, ranking-based pipelines toward autonomous and interactive systems.<n>This survey introduces a unified taxonomy grounded in the level of autonomy and three core paradigms of agentic recommender systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-05T17:55:05Z)
• OLIVIA: Online Learning via Inference-time Action Adaptation for Decision Making in LLM ReAct Agents [74.20327254615854]
  Large language model agents interleave reasoning, action selection, and observation to solve sequential decision-making tasks.<n>Existing inference-time adaptation methods for LLM agents mainly rely on prompting or retrieval.<n>We propose OLIVIA, an inference-time action adaptation framework for ReAct-style agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-11T19:28:20Z)
• Contextual Multi-Objective Optimization: Rethinking Objectives in Frontier AI Systems [20.864964136537772]
  We argue that many AI failures are not merely failures of scale or capability, but failures of objective selection.<n>We formulate this problem as emphcontextual multi-objective optimization.<n>Our framework models AI behavior as a context-dependent choice rule over candidate actions, objective estimates, active constraints, stakeholders, uncertainty, and conflict-resolution procedures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-05T15:55:19Z)
• KnowU-Bench: Towards Interactive, Proactive, and Personalized Mobile Agent Evaluation [72.01173512175531]
  KnowU-Bench is an online benchmark for personalized mobile agents.<n>It covers 42 general GUI tasks, 86 personalized tasks, and 64 proactive tasks.<n>Our experiments reveal a striking degradation: agents that excel at explicit task execution fall below 50% under vague instructions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-09T16:50:50Z)
• ReIn: Conversational Error Recovery with Reasoning Inception [43.5498321001366]
  This work focuses on error recovery, which necessitates the accurate diagnosis of erroneous dialogue contexts and execution of proper recovery plans.<n>We propose Reasoning Inception (ReIn), a test-time intervention method that plants an initial reasoning into the agent's decision-making process.<n>We evaluate ReIn by systematically simulating conversational failure scenarios that directly hinder successful completion of user goals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-19T02:37:29Z)
• Online Decision Mediation [72.80902932543474]
  Consider learning a decision support assistant to serve as an intermediary between (oracle) expert behavior and (imperfect) human behavior. In clinical diagnosis, fully-autonomous machine behavior is often beyond ethical affordances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T05:59:43Z)
• Inverse Online Learning: Understanding Non-Stationary and Reactionary Policies [79.60322329952453]
  We show how to develop interpretable representations of how agents make decisions. By understanding the decision-making processes underlying a set of observed trajectories, we cast the policy inference problem as the inverse to this online learning problem. We introduce a practical algorithm for retrospectively estimating such perceived effects, alongside the process through which agents update them. Through application to the analysis of UNOS organ donation acceptance decisions, we demonstrate that our approach can bring valuable insights into the factors that govern decision processes and how they change over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-14T17:40:42Z)
• Inverse Active Sensing: Modeling and Understanding Timely Decision-Making [111.07204912245841]
  We develop a framework for the general setting of evidence-based decision-making under endogenous, context-dependent time pressure. We demonstrate how it enables modeling intuitive notions of surprise, suspense, and optimality in decision strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-25T02:30:45Z)

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.