mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Intelligence as Managed Autonomy: Failure, Escalation, and Governance for Agentic AI Systems

arXiv 2605.27628 ↗First posted 26 May 2026cs.AI cs.CY cs.ETcited by 2

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

Abstract (arXiv)

As autonomous and agentic AI systems scale in robotic and human-machine environments, managing hallucination and persistent but unjustified action remains an open challenge. Rather than attributing these failures solely to model or alignment limitations, this paper explores the architectural vulnerability of unbounded autonomy - the presumption that an agent should continue operating regardless of rising uncertainty. It introduces a theory of managed autonomy that defines intelligent behavior through the formal capacity to detect epistemic drift, suspend reasoning, attempt recovery, and ultimately surrender control when reliability diminishes. We instantiate this theory via the SMARt (Self-Managing Multi-tier Autonomous Reasoning with Regulated/Revoked transitions) model, a four-layer framework featuring Stable, Meta-cognitive, Assisted, and Regulated states. By developing a timed, guarded Petri net formulation, we establish theoretically bounded properties for the system, demonstrating how architecture can formally mandate escalation, constrain invalid outputs, and ensure governance reachability under specified conditions. We further analyze how incorporating domain-specific trigger sets across varied operational settings (e.g., healthcare, robotics, etc.) can systematically preserve safety, assuming completeness and soundness criteria are met. Because these triggers are designed to be adaptive, the SMARt model accommodates the safe, controlled expansion of an agent's operational scope over time. We conclude that formalizing failure management within the autonomy lifecycle is a crucial step toward realizing reliable and governed artificial intelligence.

Key facts. Cited by 2 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 33 of its 92 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 May 2026.

Builds on

33 of 92 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025AGENTSAFE: A Unified Framework for Ethical Assurance and Governance in Agentic AI2 Dec
  2. 2025From surveillance to signalling: escalation channels as environmental controls for agentic AI6 Oct
  3. 2025SAGA: A Security Architecture for Governing AI Agentic Systems27 Apr

Other references · 30

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
  3. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
  4. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
  5. 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,601
  6. 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,072
  7. 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,064
  8. 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,598
  9. 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,317
  10. 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 2,950
  11. 2020Learning to summarize from human feedbackcited by 2,562
  12. 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agentscited by 2,203
18 more
  1. 2023Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debatecited by 1,739
  2. 2022Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language Modelscited by 1,359
  3. 2023Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yetcited by 965
  4. 2023Teaching Large Language Models to Self-Debugcited by 963
  5. 2023CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquingcited by 751
  6. 2018AI safety via debatecited by 384
  7. 2023Language Models can Solve Computer Taskscited by 371
  8. 2024When Can LLMs Actually Correct Their Own Mistakes? A Critical Survey of Self-Correction of LLMscited by 230
  9. 2020Open Problems in Cooperative AIcited by 167
  10. 2022Faithful Reasoning Using Large Language Modelscited by 130
  11. 2023Why think step by step? Reasoning emerges from the locality of experiencecited by 103
  12. 2016The Off-Switch Gamecited by 97
  13. 2023Self-Evaluation Improves Selective Generation in Large Language Modelscited by 74
  14. 2017Reinforcement Learning with a Corrupted Reward Channelcited by 68
  15. 2018Finding Options that Minimize Planning Timecited by 17
  16. 2025Can LLMs Correct Themselves? A Benchmark of Self-Correction in LLMscited by 12
  17. 2023FoPro-KD: Fourier Prompted Effective Knowledge Distillation for Long-Tailed Medical Image Recognitioncited by 9
  18. 2026Self-Verification Dilemma: Experience-Driven Suppression of Overused Checking in LLM Reasoningcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Autonomy and Agency in Agentic AI: Architectural Tactics for Regulated Contexts
  2. 2026Separating Capability from Permission: A Governance Framework for Agentic AI Autonomy Levels
  3. 2026Behavioral Governance for Autonomous AI Agents: The AgentBound Framework
  4. 2026Bounded Autonomy and Verifiable Safety for Agentic AI Enabled Automation
  5. 2025Architectures for Building Agentic AI
  6. 2026Think Before You Act -- A Neurocognitive Governance Model for Autonomous AI Agents
  7. 2026Evaluating Bounded Autonomy in Regulated Agentic AI: A Diagnostic Harness with Constitutional Rewards, Escalation Labels, and Runtime Governance
  8. 2025Alignment, Agency and Autonomy in Frontier AI: A Systems Engineering Perspective