Tema

Agentes

3065documentos

252últimos 7 días

Harness Continual Learning: Continual Adaptation Beyond Model Parameters

Continual learning has largely been model-centric, treating model parameters as the state that changes with sequential experience. Modern agents can also adapt through a harness of prompts, memories, tools, skills, and routing rules. Because these contents jointly shape later execution, a harness update can disrupt previously reliable behavior even when the model is frozen. This raises a new question: how can an agent continually improve its state outside the model while retaining behavior acquired earlier? We formulate Harness Continual Learning (HCL), a new continual learning paradigm in which the harness evolves around a frozen foundation model, and define the resulting loss of earlier behavior as harness-level forgetting. We instantiate HCL with four execution-facing components: the Task Interface, Experience Memory, Capability Map, and Adaptive Router. We further introduce guarded harness evolution to separate update generation from state commitment. A Continual Optimizer proposes candidate harnesses from post-execution feedback, and a Continual Evaluator commits the resulting candidate harness only after checking current improvement, historical retention, and validity. Experiments on textual reasoning, multimodal perception, and open-world interaction demonstrate capability accumulation and failure recovery, with relative gains exceeding 10% over corresponding baselines in multiple settings. Component ablations assess the contribution of each harness component, while controlled retention sweeps reveal measurable harness-level forgetting and show that the stability--plasticity trade-off can be explicitly adjusted.

arXiv AI Papershace 3 meses

A Theory of Post-hoc Debate Judgement

Debates have recently emerged as a useful methodology for agentic AI to improve performance as well as to aid explainability and user engagement. For example, LLM-empowered agents may debate internally (with themselves) and/or externally (with other agents). In many settings where debates are used, debates' outcomes and resulting outputs are determined post-hoc by external judges, often LLMs. In this paper we develop and test a novel theory of debate judgement applicable to all settings where agents engage in debates by providing pros and cons for their opinions therein. Specifically, we identify a number of formal properties that debate judgement may be required to satisfy in general, as concerns reproducibility, robustness, groundedness and explainability. Then, we explore their satisfaction formally and/or experimentally, for claim verification settings, for two specific alternative debate judgement methods: variants of the LLMs as a judge idea and formal semantics drawn from computational argumentation. We show that the two methods give similar accuracy performances but the former may lack formal guarantees that the latter brings. Overall, our study indicates argumentation semantics as an ideal candidate for principled judges in debate-driven AI.

VentureBeat AIhace 3 meses

VentureBeat names Rob Strechay as its first Lead Analyst, expanding its enterprise AI research push

Rob Strechay, until recently managing director and principal analyst at theCUBE Research, has joined VentureBeat as our first Lead Analyst and a founding analyst of…

en▲ 5

AWS Machine Learning Bloghace 3 meses

Amazon Bedrock AgentCore payments is now generally available: Enabling agents to transact safely and autonomously at scale

Amazon Bedrock AgentCore payments is now generally available, enabling AI agents to autonomously transact at scale with built-in spending guardrails, protocol-agnostic payment orchestration, and production-ready observability.

Hugging Face Bloghace 3 meses

How Much Memory Does Your Agent Actually Need?

arXiv AI Papershace 3 meses

Multi-Agent AI System for Radiology Report Structuring and Quality Assurance with Independent Radiologist Evaluation

Purpose: To develop and evaluate a locally deployed multi-agent AI system for radiology report structuring and quality assurance. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 638 radiology reports from CT examinations of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis dictated by 15 board-certified radiologists in 2023 and 2024. A multi-agent AI pipeline was developed to perform report structuring and quality assurance (QA). The system structured the report into standardized anatomical sections at the sentence level using regex rules and local large language models. It also detected mismatches between the Findings and Impression sections, or within sections; gender-anatomy conflicts; and undocumented communication of critical findings. Two board-certified radiologists independently evaluated a 45-report subset. Results: The multi-agent system structured the Findings sections of all reports (22,270 sentences) into a predefined anatomical format while retaining the original report content. The system flagged 90 (14.1%) reports, most commonly for section mismatches (80 reports, 12.5%). In the radiologist evaluation, both reviewers agreed that 31 (69%) were correctly restructured, 2 reports (4%) were incorrectly restructured, and disagreed on the remaining 12 reports (27%). Both reviewers agreed that no clinically important information was omitted and no fabricated content was introduced. Overall QA performance was rated as "excellent" or "good" in 84% of the evaluated reports, with the remaining reports rated as "fair". Conclusion: A locally deployed multi-agent AI system combined radiology report structuring and quality assurance within a single workflow. The system demonstrated favorable performance in radiologist evaluation. Such systems may support standardization of reporting and quality assurance in radiology practice.

arXiv AI Papershace 3 meses

On the Fragility of Self-Improving Agents: Variance, Task Order, and Underspecification

Memory-based self-improving agents--those that learn from an online stream of tasks and improve over time by maintaining a textual memory bank--have shown great promise in recent literature. However, the reliability aspects of these methods have been critically overlooked. In this work, we conduct a comprehensive re-evaluation of two memory-based methods, broadening the scope of evaluation along two axes: (1) including multiple runs to quantify variance, and (2) randomly shuffling the tasks to investigate the effect of task order. Through these experiments, we make two observations that expose the fragility of current methods: First, agent evaluation is inherently noisy in complex environments and on multi-step tasks, and stacking a self-improving loop on top can further amplify this noise. Second, the agent's improvement is highly dependent on task order. Prior works often adopt default orderings that impose an implicit curriculum, acting as a hidden prerequisite for success. To better understand this fragility, we manually examine the agents' memory and hypothesize that task and environment underspecification contribute to this fragility. We validate this hypothesis by incorporating information that enables better specification, such as detailed rubrics and environment feedback, into the memory construction process. While this added information partially closes the performance degradation in previous experiments, significant gaps still remain, suggesting that other uncharacterized factors contribute to this fragility. Looking ahead, our work advocates for more rigorous evaluation protocols for self-improving agents by reporting results across multiple runs and stress-testing them under challenging conditions. Moreover, our findings on underspecification call for systems and interfaces that enable effective human oversight, preventing agents from failing in unforeseeable ways.

arXiv AI Papershace 3 meses

Delegation Asymmetry in Agentic Recommender Systems: Measuring Two-Sided Receptivity in Online Dating

Autonomous LLM agents that converse on a user's behalf are an emerging design pattern in matching platforms, yet their viability depends on a condition rarely examined: users must accept not only delegating conversation to an agent, but also receiving agent-mediated communication from others. We study this condition using two large-scale surveys of active users of a major dating platform (N=2,894 on generative profile features; N=2,617 on autonomous conversational agents, fielded in two languages). We develop a latent-variable measurement model of agent receptivity based on graded response models with latent regression, and show via model comparison that willingness to send and willingness to receive agent communication are distinct constructs: highly correlated (rho=0.92) but separable (Delta BIC=52), with partial measurement invariance across languages. The model quantifies a systematic delegation asymmetry: deploying one's own agent requires far lower receptivity (threshold -0.38) than engaging a counterpart's agent (+0.32; full engagement +1.39), and mean deployment propensity exceeds engagement propensity roughly threefold. Under a random-pairing counterfactual derived from stated receptivity, only 4-13% of directed dyads combine agent deployment with receiver engagement, with a pronounced gender-directional imbalance. Design counterfactuals quantify the levers: a reciprocity requirement cuts interaction volume by half or more by excluding nearly two-thirds of would-be deployment, while routing agent contacts on receive receptivity triples per-contact engagement, a lift that survives out-of-sample validation with the target item held out (AUC 0.88, 3.1x quartile lift under respondent-level cross-validation). We discuss implications for agentic recommender design, including disclosure, opt-in mechanics, and receptivity-aware matchmaking.

arXiv AI Papershace 3 meses

StagedWorkspace: A Versioned Workspace for Knowledge-Work Agents

AI agents increasingly perform knowledge work (i.e., produce and modify persistent digital artifacts such as code repositories, documents, spreadsheets, slides, reports), yet the parsed views they search, the native files they edit, the changes they review, and the artifacts they submit can refer to different versions of the same work product. We formulate this as a workspace-state contract: every view should be explicitly tied to a version of the evolving workspace state. Coding agents partly address this need through repository contracts for search, diffs, and tests, whereas an analogous contract is less explicit for PDFs, spreadsheets, slides, notebooks, and mixed-format project folders. We propose StagedWorkspace, a versioned workspace for knowledge-work agents. The workspace binds parsed records and review diffs to content hashes of the native files as they change. In fixed-harness ablations on OfficeQA Pro and APEX-Agents, dual parsed/native access has the highest point estimate for every tested model; relative to the more limiting single view, it improves OfficeQA Pass@1 by 8.3-12.1 points and APEX mean rubric score by 4.7-9.2 points. SW-AGENT scores 63.9% with Gemini 3.1 Pro on OfficeQA and 42.1 with GPT-5.4 Nano on APEX, compared with published same-model scores of 29.3% and 25.5, respectively. A paired review-axis ablation on 57 file-editing tasks further finds higher observed scores when diffs are visible. These results identify workspace state as an experimental variable in knowledge-work agents and motivate benchmarks that score evidence, staged edits, and submitted artifacts as explicit state transitions.

arXiv AI Papershace 3 meses

Language Has Two Parameters: Narrative-Induced Semantic Plasticity and Phase-Sensitive Interpretation

Language has two parameters. Count how often words occur together and you estimate amplitude, the strength of association. Word embeddings and attention weights refine that count, which sums every writer in the corpus together. This paper claims a second parameter, phase, which signed weights learned from a corpus do not supply. Phase exists only between meanings: it determines how coactivated meanings combine, and it can reverse what a meaning contributes while that meaning stays fully present. A speaker can set phase in the signal through linguistic form; encounters install phase relations and history distributes them. Population averaging deletes history-indexed phase: agent-deindexed corpora identify the population marginal state and determine no individual or dyadic state, at any scale. The standard transformer has no explicit representation for phase in frozen inference, and the interpretability program measuring progress by monosemanticity is optimizing against it: the coexistence it treats as a defect is the condition of allusion, irony, and quotation. Six predictions test whether a suppressed meaning stays active, whether encounter order changes what a phrase does, whether marking the signal changes how a shared phrase is taken, and whether a model given a history is changed by it or only informed about it. The claim defended is the weak version: interpretation requires a second relational parameter, signed, persistent, and indexed to individuals and dyads. Quantum probability is one notation for the parameter; nothing in the formalism claims quantum processes in the brain. The strong version, that the quantum calculus constrains these phenomena as signed classical models do not, rests on an encounter-order constraint not yet derived. The architecture the theory calls for is a language model with agent-indexed, phase-bearing semantic states.