mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The Oversight Game: Learning to Cooperatively Balance an AI Agent's Safety and Autonomy

arXiv 2510.26752 ↗First posted 30 Oct 2025cs.AI cs.LGcited by 3

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance

Abstract (arXiv)

As increasingly capable agents are deployed, a central safety challenge is how to retain meaningful human control without modifying the underlying system. We study a minimal control interface in which an agent chooses whether to act autonomously (play) or defer (ask), while a human simultaneously chooses whether to be permissive (trust) or engage in oversight (oversee), and model this interaction as a two-player Markov game. When this game forms a Markov Potential Game, we prove an alignment guarantee: any increase in the agent's utility from acting more autonomously cannot decrease the human's value. This establishes a form of intrinsic alignment where the agent's incentive to seek autonomy is structurally coupled to the human's welfare. Practically, the framework induces a transparent control layer that encourages the agent to defer when risky and act when safe. While we use gridworld simulations to illustrate the emergence of this collaboration, our primary validation involves an agentic tool-use task in which two 30B parameter language models are fine-tuned via independent policy gradient. We demonstrate that even as the agents learn to coordinate on the fly, this framework effectively reduces safety violations in realistic, open-ended environments.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 42 of its 69 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Oct 2025.

Builds on

42 of 69 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2023Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated Sandbox25 Sep

Other references · 41

  1. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
  2. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,846
  3. 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,598
  4. 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 2,950
  5. 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,582
  6. 2019Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning: A Selective Overview of Theories and Algorithmscited by 555
  7. 2023Weak-to-Strong Generalization: Eliciting Strong Capabilities With Weak Supervisioncited by 445
  8. 2018Scalable agent alignment via reward modeling: a research directioncited by 438
  9. 2017Safe Reinforcement Learning via Shieldingcited by 427
  10. 2018AI safety via debatecited by 384
  11. 2016Cooperative Inverse Reinforcement Learningcited by 298
  12. 2017Inverse Reward Designcited by 246
29 more
  1. 2023An Overview of Catastrophic AI Riskscited by 214
  2. 2022Measuring Progress on Scalable Oversight for Large Language Modelscited by 212
  3. 2023AI Control: Improving Safety Despite Intentional Subversioncited by 207
  4. 2018Supervising strong learners by amplifying weak expertscited by 139
  5. 2017Trial without Error: Towards Safe Reinforcement Learning via Human Interventioncited by 102
  6. 2022Is Power-Seeking AI an Existential Risk?cited by 101
  7. 2016The Off-Switch Gamecited by 97
  8. 2024On scalable oversight with weak LLMs judging strong LLMscited by 94
  9. 2021Global Convergence of Multi-Agent Policy Gradient in Markov Potential Gamescited by 89
  10. 2025Superintelligent Agents Pose Catastrophic Risks: Can Scientist AI Offer a Safer Path?cited by 70
  11. 2021When Can We Learn General-Sum Markov Games with a Large Number of Players Sample-Efficiently?cited by 63
  12. 2021Safe Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning via Shieldingcited by 60
  13. 2022Independent Policy Gradient for Large-Scale Markov Potential Games: Sharper Rates, Function Approximation, and Game-Agnostic Convergencecited by 54
  14. 2023Scalable AI Safety via Doubly-Efficient Debatecited by 54
  15. 2023Safe Reinforcement Learning via Probabilistic Logic Shieldscited by 41
  16. 2021Independent Natural Policy Gradient Always Converges in Markov Potential Gamescited by 34
  17. 2020AI Research Considerations for Human Existential Safety (ARCHES)cited by 33
  18. 2025Evaluating Frontier Models for Stealth and Situational Awarenesscited by 30
  19. 2022On the Global Convergence Rates of Decentralized Softmax Gradient Play in Markov Potential Gamescited by 22
  20. 2019Learning to Interactively Learn and Assistcited by 20
  21. 2018An Efficient, Generalized Bellman Update For Cooperative Inverse Reinforcement Learningcited by 15
  22. 2025Language Agents as Digital Representatives in Collective Decision-Makingcited by 15
  23. 2025AssistanceZero: Scalably Solving Assistance Gamescited by 10
  24. 2024The Partially Observable Off-Switch Gamecited by 5
  25. 2025Core Safety Values for Provably Corrigible Agentscited by 4
  26. 2020Multi-Principal Assistance Games: Definition and Collegial Mechanismscited by 2
  27. 2024Aligning AI Agents via Information-Directed Samplingcited by 2
  28. 2025Misalignment from Treating Means as Endscited by 2
  29. 2019Tolling for Constraint Satisfaction in Markov Decision Process Congestion Gamescited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Calibrating Conservatism for Scalable Oversight
  2. 2026Position: AI Safety Requires Effective Controllability
  3. 2026Anticipatory Human Oversight of Agentic AI: A Philosophical Account
  4. 2026AI Alignment through a Game-theoretic Lens: A Survey
  5. 2026One Gate Is Not Enough: Composing Stateful Pre-Action Controls for Agentic AI
  6. 2026Institutional AI: A Governance Framework for Distributional AGI Safety
  7. 2026Institutional Red-Teaming: Deployment Rules, Not Just Models, Causally Shape Multi-Agent AI Safety
  8. 2026Reward Hacking in Language Model Agents: Revisiting AI Safety Gridworlds