From Evidence to Effect: Authority Semantics and Runtime Infrastructure for Stateful Agents
Open accessAbstract
Stateful agents reuse artifacts after producing executions and permissions change. We formalize authority-sufficient observations and durable effects bound to execution and material identities. WTB implements this interface through runtime adapters, shared evidence, and transactional publication/recovery. Six study families separate the mechanism from its integration. Raw and typed evidence both solve 32/32 authority cases, with model-dependent planning effects. Fixed-intent enforcement blocks six unsafe proposals and executes 12 eligible authorized intents. Complete controls match WTB's capability. Paid integration yields 176/210 accepted benchmark-source stages, including 19/30 publication stages, recovery on 8/8 primary SWE repositories, and the most complete continuous trajectories on each of three source tasks. The findings connect authority information, effect admission, and infrastructure reuse in stateful agents.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Cross-substrate authority work argues that authority state must survive movement among agent runtimes and orchestration surfaces.
“Cross-substrate authority work likewise argues that authority state must survive movement among agent runtimes and orchestration surfaces [14].”
From Authorization for Self-Modifying AI Agent Populations: Conserving Authority across Replacement, Forking, and Rollback (2026) · cites this paper as [14]
The Abstract describes authority state held by a runtime, registry, or approval service outside agent memory and workspaces. The section “Separate artifact identity from action authorization” argues for binding that state to an action permit and validating it at execution. Our copy does not establish that authority state must survive movement among different agent runtimes or orchestration surfaces. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Mahesh Balakrishnan, Ashwin Bharambe, Davide Testuggine, David Geraghty, David Mao, Vidhya Venkat, Ilya Mironov, Rithesh Baradi, Gayathri Aiyer, and Victoria Dudin. Logact: Enabling agentic reliability via shared logs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.07988, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.07988. · arXiv
- Hongtao Lyu, Dingyan Zhang, Mingyu Wu, Xingda Wei, and Haibo Chen. Coagent: Con- currency control for multi-agent systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.15376, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.15376. · arXiv
- Yanki Margalit, Nurit Cohen-Inger, Erni Avram, Ran Taig, and Oded Margalit. Governed shared memory for multi-agent llm systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.24535, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.24535. · arXiv
- Kai Mei, Xi Zhu, Wujiang Xu, Wenyue Hua, Mingyu Jin, Zelong Li, Shuyuan Xu, Ruosong Ye, Yingqiang Ge, and Yongfeng Zhang. Aios: Llm agent operating system. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.16971, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.16971. · arXiv
- Ciyan Ouyang and Rui Hou. Memlineage: Lineage-guided enforcement for llm agent memory. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.14421, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.14421. · arXiv
- Charles Packer, Sarah Wooders, Kevin Lin, Vivian Fang, Shishir G. Patil, Ion Stoica, and Joseph E. Gonzalez. Memgpt: Towards llms as operating systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.08560, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.08560. · arXiv
- Renan Souza, Amal Gueroudji, Stephen DeWitt, Daniel Rosendo, Tirthankar Ghosal, Robert Ross, Prasanna Balaprakash, and Rafael Ferreira da Silva. Prov-agent: Unified provenance for tracking ai agent interactions in agentic workflows. Proceedings of the 21st IEEE International Conference on e-Science, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.02866. · arXiv
- Santiago Torres-Arias, Hammad Afzali, Trishank Karthik Kuppusamy, Reza Curtmola, and Justin Cappos. in-toto: Providing farm-to-table guarantees for bits and bytes. In 28th USENIX Security Symposium, pages 1393-1410, 2019. URL https://www.usenix.org/conference/ usenixsecurity19/presentation/torres-arias.
- Yiqi Wang, Zihao Yan, Jiaqi Zhang, Zhangkai Wu, Mingkai Zheng, Zequn Sun, Yanming Zhu, and Taotao Cai. Map-graph: Provenance-aware shared memory for multi-agent workflows. arXiv preprint arXiv:2608.10509, 2026. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.10509. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Zhu, G., & Wang, C. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2610.00347
- Authors
- Li, Y., Xu, Z., Volkov, S., liu, H., Zhou, T., Chen, X., Wan, D., Shao, D., Luo, Y., & Sun, H.
- Affiliations
- University of Hong Kong (HK)
- Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HK)
- Shenzhen University (CN)
- ORCID
- Shao, Dian
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2026
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2609.08472
- OpenAlex
- W7212081255
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Access Control and Trust
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
- Keywords
- multi-agent systems, authorization, agent harnesses, memory governance, agent planning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
