mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Ethical Hyper-Velocity (EHV): A Hardware-Rooted Zero-Trust Runtime Enforcement Architecture for Agentic AI Systems

arXiv 2605.17909 ↗First posted 18 May 2026cs.AI cs.LOcited by 0

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

Abstract (arXiv)

As autonomous agentic systems scale across regulated critical infrastructures, the lack of mechanistic, hardware-rooted enforcement for high-frequency policy updates presents a fundamental safety gap. We present Ethical Hyper-Velocity (EHV), a governance-aware runtime enforcement architecture for agentic systems that combines Grammar-Constrained Decoding (GCD) for inline policy-constrained token generation, Causal Graph CRDT-based policy synchronization with vector-clock ordering, hardware-attested execution in Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs), and OSCAL-formatted machine-readable audit logging. Unlike retrospective auditing frameworks (ISO/IEC 42001, NIST AI RMF) that introduce 14-30 day policy latencies, EHV relocates the Policy Enforcement Point (PEP) into the inference pipeline via a Governance-Aware Just-In-Time (JIT) Compiler. Under explicitly stated assumptions, the architecture reduces enforcement latency, improves traceability, and supports formal verification of safety invariants in a bounded model. We demonstrate via TLA+ model checking that non-compliant agentic actions were unreachable in the verified bounded operating state space (1,738 states generated, 324 distinct, depth 8, zero violations). Under these conditions, O(1) runtime enforcement reduces the traditional trade-off between deployment velocity and governance integrity, targeting Governance Latency from O(days) toward O(1). EHV's differentiating contribution is the integration of GCD, Causal CRDT, TEE attestation caching, and bounded formal verification into a single, hardware-rooted enforcement architecture -- a combination not achieved by any contemporaneous system. The architecture is demonstrated through a pediatric oncology dosage use case, with applicability to regulated critical infrastructures including healthcare, financial compliance, and critical infrastructure control.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 10 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 May 2026.

Builds on

10 of 39 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026AgenTEE: Confidential LLM Agent Execution on Edge Devices20 Apr
  2. 2025MI9: An Integrated Runtime Governance Framework for Agentic AI5 Aug
  3. 2025AgentSpec: Customizable Runtime Enforcement for Safe and Reliable LLM Agents24 Mar

Other references · 7

  1. 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 3,050
  2. 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,642
  3. 2023NeMo Guardrails: A Toolkit for Controllable and Safe LLM Applications with Programmable Railscited by 365
  4. 2023Efficient Guided Generation for Large Language Modelscited by 200
  5. 2024XGrammar: Flexible and Efficient Structured Generation Engine for Large Language Modelscited by 75
  6. 2026Cryptographic Runtime Governance for Autonomous AI Systems: The Aegis Architecture for Verifiable Policy Enforcementcited by 5
  7. 2026Making AI Compliance Evidence Machine-Readablecited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026SARC: A Governance-by-Architecture Framework for Agentic AI Systems
  2. 2026Behavioral Governance for Autonomous AI Agents: The AgentBound Framework
  3. 2026Sovereign Agentic Loops: Decoupling AI Reasoning from Execution in Real-World Systems
  4. 2025Governance-as-a-Service: A Multi-Agent Framework for AI System Compliance and Policy Enforcement
  5. 2026OpenAgentFlow: Enabling System-Wide Safety Boundaries for Heterogeneous AI Agent Fleets
  6. 2026Runtime Governance for Agentic AI: Action-Boundary Control with Trusted Provenance and Fail-Closed Execution
  7. 2026Engineering Reliable Commit Gates for Agentic AI: Cost-Aware Verification Portfolios under Common-Mode Data Failures
  8. 2026The Unfireable Safety Kernel: Execution-Time AI Alignment for AI Agents and Other Escapable AI Systems