# Visioning Human-Agentic AI Teaming: Continuity, Tension, and Future Research

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.04746 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.04746/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 11 of its 75 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 5 Mar 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [General LLM agent frameworks and benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/agents/general-llm-agent-frameworks-and-benchmarks/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 11 of 11)

- ["Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.04938/) (2016)
- [Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behavior](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.03442/) (2023)
- [Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.11279/) (2017)
- [How is ChatGPT's behavior changing over time?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09009/) (2023)
- [Agent AI: Surveying the Horizons of Multimodal Interaction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.03568/) (2024)
- [Generative artificial intelligence enhances creativity but reduces the diversity of novel content](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.00506/) (2023)
- [Agentic AI: A Comprehensive Survey of Architectures, Applications, and Future Directions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.25445/) (2025)
- [Uncertainty Quantification for In-Context Learning of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10189/) (2024)
- [Sensible AI: Re-imagining Interpretability and Explainability using Sensemaking Theory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.05057/) (2022)
- [Agentic AI Needs a Systems Theory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.00237/) (2025)
- [Path Drift in Large Reasoning Models:How First-Person Commitments Override Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.10013/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Artificial intelligence is undergoing a structural transformation marked by the rise of agentic systems capable of open-ended action trajectories, generative representations and outputs, and evolving objectives. These properties introduce structural uncertainty into human-AI teaming (HAT), including uncertainty about behavior trajectories, epistemic grounding, and the stability of governing logics over time. Under such conditions, alignment cannot be secured through agreement on bounded outputs; it must be continuously sustained as plans unfold and priorities shift. We advance Team Situation Awareness (Team SA) theory, grounded in shared perception, comprehension, and projection, as an integrative anchor for this transition. While Team SA remains analytically foundational, its stabilizing logic presumes that shared awareness, once achieved, will support coordinated action through iterative updating. Agentic AI challenges this presumption. Our argument unfolds in two stages: first, we extend Team SA to reconceptualize both human and AI awareness under open-ended agency, including the sensemaking of projection congruence across heterogeneous systems. Second, we interrogate whether the dynamic processes traditionally assumed to stabilize teaming in relational interaction, cognitive learning, and coordination and control continue to function under adaptive autonomy. By distinguishing continuity from tension, we clarify where foundational insights hold and where structural uncertainty introduces strain, and articulate a forward-looking research agenda for HAT. The central challenge of HAT is not whether humans and AI can agree in the moment, but whether they can remain aligned as futures are continuously generated, revised, enacted, and governed over time.