# Adaptive Monitoring and Real-World Evaluation of Agentic AI Systems

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.00115 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.00115/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 4 of its 23 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 28 Aug 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Agent threats, guardrails and governance](https://mlsanity.com/agents/agent-threats-guardrails-and-governance/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [AI Agents vs. Agentic AI: A Conceptual Taxonomy, Applications and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.10468/) (2025)
- [Multi-Agent Risks from Advanced AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.14143/) (2025)
- [The Measurement Imbalance in Agentic AI Evaluation Undermines Industry Productivity Claims](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.02064/) (2025)
- [GEMMAS: Graph-based Evaluation Metrics for Multi Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.13190/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [AgentCompass: Towards Reliable Evaluation of Agentic Workflows in Production](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.14647/) (2025)
- [Testing and Evaluation of Agentic AI Systems In Military Command and Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.20597/) (2026)
- [AgentStripes: An Evidence-Graded Maturity Model for AI Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.18603/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Agentic artificial intelligence (AI) -- multi-agent systems that combine large language models with external tools and autonomous planning -- are rapidly transitioning from research laboratories into high-stakes domains. Our earlier "Basic" paper introduced a five-axis framework and proposed preliminary metrics such as goal drift and harm reduction but did not provide an algorithmic instantiation or empirical evidence. This "Advanced" sequel fills that gap. First, we revisit recent benchmarks and industrial deployments to show that technical metrics still dominate evaluations: a systematic review of 84 papers from 2023--2025 found that 83% report capability metrics while only 30% consider human-centred or economic axes [2]. Second, we formalise an Adaptive Multi-Dimensional Monitoring (AMDM) algorithm that normalises heterogeneous metrics, applies per-axis exponentially weighted moving-average thresholds and performs joint anomaly detection via the Mahalanobis distance [7]. Third, we conduct simulations and real-world experiments. AMDM cuts anomaly-detection latency from 12.3 s to 5.6 s on simulated goal drift and reduces false-positive rates from 4.5% to 0.9% compared with static thresholds. We present a comparison table and ROC/PR curves, and we reanalyse case studies to surface missing metrics. Code, data and a reproducibility checklist accompany this paper to facilitate replication. The code supporting this work is available at https://github.com/Manishms18/Adaptive-Multi-Dimensional-Monitoring.