An Evidence Model for Agentic Processes: Evidence Claims, Trust Assumptions, and Policy Assessment

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.08481v1
• Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2026 09:25:28 GMT
• Title: An Evidence Model for Agentic Processes: Evidence Claims, Trust Assumptions, and Policy Assessment
• Abstract summary: This paper proposes an evidence claim model for agentic processes.<n>It distinguishes artifact integrity, temporal existence, provenance, approval evidence, declared ordering, capture claim, relevance claim, deliberation traceability, monitoring claim, anchoring authorization claim, policy assessment claim, risk treatment claim, mitigation implementation claim, and management response claim.<n>The model maps these claims to mechanisms, assumptions, limitations, and threats, and situates them in an agent organization with functional CEO agent, executive, operational, evidence, and audit roles, plus a plan-do-check-act-inspired management response loop.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Agentic AI systems increasingly exchange messages, invoke tools, request approvals, hold structured decision sessions, and modify shared artifacts. Logs and anchors can make selected records tamper-evident, but they can also mislead if their evidentiary meaning is implicit: a hash does not establish semantic truth, a signature does not establish authorization, and an external anchor does not establish capture completeness. This paper proposes an evidence claim model for agentic processes. It distinguishes artifact integrity, temporal existence, provenance, approval evidence, declared ordering, capture claim, relevance claim, deliberation traceability, monitoring claim, anchoring authorization claim, policy assessment claim, risk treatment claim, mitigation implementation claim, and management response claim. Semantic validity is treated as a recurring limitation. The model maps these claims to mechanisms, assumptions, limitations, and threats, and situates them in an agent organization with functional CEO agent, executive, operational, evidence, and audit roles, plus a plan-do-check-act-inspired management response loop. The contribution is conceptual: it does not validate a particular implementation, prevent all failures, or automate legal compliance. It provides a vocabulary for stating which claims an agentic black box can support, which claims it cannot establish, and which controls are required around it.

Related papers

• From Intent to Execution Grant: An Execution-Boundary Conformance Profile for High-Risk AI Actions [9.27474112226667]
  EBL-Core decides whether one canonical, fully materialized AI-generated candidate may receive action-scoped execution authority under explicit conditions.<n>It binds, policy non-weakening, evidence handling, deterministic adjudication, verification, and grant lifecycle behavior.<n>Across 100 trials, 32 concurrent Redemption attempts yielded exactly one successful Redemption and protected test effect per trial.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-10T14:21:45Z)
• A Black Box for Agentic Processes: Blockchain-Anchored Evidence for AI Agent Communication, Human Oversight, and GRC Audits [0.0]
  Motivated by the 2026 OpenAI/Hugging Face incident, this position and architecture paper proposes a product- and vendor-neutral black-box architecture for agentic processes.<n>The architecture creates blockchain-anchored cryptographic commitments for selected agent communications, human-in-the-loop approvals, tool calls, and process artifacts without placing sensitive content on-chain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-03T15:55:39Z)
• Stored Is Not Supported: Typed Provenance and Assertion Guardrails for Persistent AI Agents [2.124730017640531]
  Persistent AI agents construct autobiographical state through reflection, retrieval, and consolidation.<n>We specify typed provenance and assertion guardrails for autobiographical assertion boundedness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-02T05:35:33Z)
• Offline-Verifiable Accountability for Cross-Organization Agent Messaging: A Preserved Evidence-Bundle Approach [0.5801044612920815]
  Cross-organization agent require preserved evidence that remains independently verifiable during later audit or dispute review.<n>Existing mechanisms provide useful pieces, including authenticated logging, delegation semantics, signed checkpoints, and consistency checks.<n>We propose a preserved evidence-bundle model and a policy-controlled offline verifier for agent-to-agent workflow events.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-28T17:18:49Z)
• Mandato: Protocol-Level Enforcement of Digitally Signed Mandates on AI Agent Actions with Cryptographically Chained Audit Trails [0.0]
  We present Mandato, a governance proxy that enforces digitally signed mandates on agent actions at the protocol level.<n>A mandate is a machine-readable, cryptographically signed authorization artifact specifying which tools an agent may invoke.<n>We describe the implementation status of the reference system and a quantitative evaluation plan covering enforcement overhead, audit completeness, and tamper-evidence verification cost.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-14T08:33:43Z)
• From Trajectories to Evidence: Auditable Experimental Records for Industrial Research Agents [47.678562263387214]
  Research agents increasingly conduct multi-round machine-learning experiments in industrial recommendation settings.<n>Yet a completed trajectory is not automatically evidence: generated artifacts may be unsupported or incomplete, executed rounds may be invalid or confounded, and later modifications may obscure earlier findings.<n>We introduce an evidence-grounded framework that couples bounded verification of consequential artifacts with post-execution claim qualification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-05T13:37:38Z)
• Towards Trustworthy Embodied Intelligence: A Systems Framework and Graded Trustworthiness Levels [53.63220028820581]
  Embodied intelligence integrates learned perception and decision making with real-time computation, control, and physical interaction.<n>We define trustworthy embodied intelligence as the sustained capacity to execute specified tasks reliably.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-28T17:50:44Z)
• Agent Security Needs Redefinition through a Holistic Framework [46.88917910966891]
  Defenses ask whether an instruction looks malicious. Benchmarks ask whether an agent performs a harmful sounding action.<n>We operationalize contextual security through four properties that must hold jointly and be evaluated continuously across the agent's trajectory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-24T06:43:09Z)
• DRNOISE: Benchmarking Deep Research Agents in Misleading Evidence Environments [51.049999642138]
  We introduce DRNOISE, a 100-task benchmark for answer recovery under misleading evidence.<n>Each task has a unique gold answer supported by two corroborating indirect record chains; the paired noisy condition adds one plausible document that states a conflicting answer directly.<n>Across agents with strong clean-task performance, this single intervention causes 66-88 percentage-point accuracy drops.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-19T15:20:40Z)
• Verifiable Agentic Infrastructure: Proof-Derived Authorization for Sovereign AI Systems [2.124730017640531]
  We introduce a verification framework for governed mutation systems that computes execution authority from structured artifacts.<n>DTF provides an infrastructure foundation for making agentic execution governable, auditable, and bounded in sovereign AI deployments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T17:58:52Z)
• Agents of Chaos [50.53354213047402]
  We report an exploratory red-teaming study of autonomous language-model-powered agents deployed in a live laboratory environment.<n>Twenty AI researchers interacted with the agents under benign and adversarial conditions.<n>Our findings establish the existence of security-, privacy-, and governance-relevant vulnerabilities in realistic deployment settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T16:28:48Z)
• Preventing the Collapse of Peer Review Requires Verification-First AI [49.995126139461085]
  We propose truth-coupling, i.e. how tightly venue scores track latent scientific truth.<n>We formalize two forces that drive a phase transition toward proxy-sovereign evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-23T17:17:32Z)

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.