Skip to content

Epi-Logic: A Conceptual Framework for Epistemic Runtime Control, Schema Validity Checking, and Controlled Accommodation in Autonomous AI Agents

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 51 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

The paper introduces Epi-Logic, a conceptual framework for epistemic runtime control that couples the detection of schema dissonance, a graduated reduction of autonomy, and the auditable switch to a validated schema.

Abstract

Autonomous AI agents are increasingly deployed in areas where wrong decisions are hard to reverse. This paper examines schema mismatch: the condition in which an agent operates within an interpretive frame that no longer applies to the current context. Outputs produced under such a mismatch can appear internally consistent, linguistically plausible, and largely factually correct; output-quality metrics alone therefore capture the underlying loss of validity only partially. The paper introduces Epi-Logic, a conceptual framework for epistemic runtime control. It couples the detection of schema dissonance, a graduated reduction of autonomy, and the auditable switch to a validated schema. A schema is formalised as a tuple of variable space, expectation model, validity conditions, axioms, and metadata. The Epi-Score aggregates seven graded dimensions of epistemic dissonance; the temporal validity dimension D8, violations of the validity conditions G, and axiom violations are carried as separate categorical paths that are not offset against the aggregate. The architecture rests on a checking asymmetry: formalised validity conditions can be checked at runtime, whereas the correctness of many actions is established only ex post. The paper separates two architectural properties, a conditional result from sequential changepoint detection, and an empirical remainder. Eight falsifiable propositions with named baselines describe the transition to empirical validation. All propositions are empirically testable hypotheses, not established results.

View source

Similar papers

Preprint Aug 2026

The Imperfective Paradox Is Not Necessarily in Large Language Models: A Benchmark Failure Before a Model Failure

The results show that models often do not affirm culmination but nevertheless accept the corresponding simple-past hypothesis, a pattern the authors characterize as Sufficiency Bias, and show that prompting interventions produce a Decision Shift among labels without reliably improving the underlying semantic understand...

Kaiqiao Han, Yi-Zhou Sun · 0 citations
Open access Aug 2026

Benchmarking Normative AI Assistants Under Inconsistent Evidence with Paraconsistent Trace Semantics

Results indicate that contradiction-aware trace evaluation provides diagnostic information beyond final-answer accuracy under the evaluated fixed-evidence conditions, while not establishing causal architectural superiority, logical non-triviality, or end-to-end RAG performance.

M. Ulizko, Aleksandr V. Chernikov, I. Tomilov et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Not What You Meant: Can LLMs Follow a Specified Negation Semantics?

NAFBench is introduced, a procedural generator of solver-certified instances spanning four semantic viewpoints: SLDNF, well-founded semantics (WFS), and credulous and skeptical reasoning under stable-model semantics, which studies which reading of negation large language models adopt by default and whether they can ove...

Qiming Bao, Agnieszka Mensfelt, Michael J. Witbrock et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Explaining AI Agents Through Execution Traces

This work presents a post-hoc XAI framework that transforms a lengthy agent's execution trace into a structured report and a faithful natural-language explanation explicitly grounded in its observable behavior, outperforming naive LLM-generated explanations.

Vittoria Vineis, Fabiano Veglianti, Lorenzo Antonelli et al. · 0 citations

Related blog posts

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.