AUDITA: certified auditing and causal attribution of adverse outcomes in autonomous multi-agent systems
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Physical automation is scaling toward fleets of embodied machines commanded by an AI brain. Early deployments already run factories and warehouses at production rates beyond any human line, and their adoption is accelerating. But when their joint decisions cause harm, everyone involved has reason to blame everyone else, the machine vendor, the algorithm provider, the factory operator, the insurer, and the regulator, and no method can divide the responsibility between them. Existing methods read logs whose origin they cannot verify and name a single culprit, misrepresenting outcomes that are overdetermined, preempted, or caused by an omission. We present AUDITA, an audit layer pairing a tamper-evident record of every inter-agent command with a certified, graded causal-attribution engine. We prove its verdict cannot be gamed: a rule-following agent can never be made to look guilty, an attempt to shift blame is itself caught and graded, and we establish the exact limit of what an evidence-based auditor can certify. On live language-model pipelines it reduces the standard judge baseline's responsibility error roughly threefold; on a benchmark of accident-grounded structures it recovers responsibility where single-culprit baselines fail, and stays invariant under forgery. AUDITA turns the question of who is to blame from an argument about logs into a calculation over evidence.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 45 of its 97 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Aug 2026.
Builds on
45 of 97 references.
References · 45
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
- 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,767
- 2023SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?cited by 3,193
- 2023RT-2: Vision-Language-Action Models Transfer Web Knowledge to Robotic Controlcited by 2,993
- 2024OpenVLA: An Open-Source Vision-Language-Action Modelcited by 2,777
- 2022Do As I Can, Not As I Say: Grounding Language in Robotic Affordancescited by 2,302
- 2024π0: A Vision-Language-Action Flow Model for General Robot Controlcited by 2,297
- 2023Voyager: An Open-Ended Embodied Agent with Large Language Modelscited by 2,081
- 2023PaLM-E: An Embodied Multimodal Language Modelcited by 2,037
- 2023AutoGen: Enabling Next-Gen LLM Applications via Multi-Agent Conversationcited by 1,906
- 2023CAMEL: Communicative Agents for "Mind" Exploration of Large Language Model Societycited by 1,348
- 2025GR00T N1: An Open Foundation Model for Generalist Humanoid Robotscited by 1,167
33 more
- 2023GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistantscited by 1,084
- 2017Counterfactual Multi-Agent Policy Gradientscited by 733
- 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?cited by 559
- 2019Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methodscited by 440
- 2025Which Agent Causes Task Failures and When? On Automated Failure Attribution of LLM Multi-Agent Systemscited by 170
- 2024AssistantBench: Can Web Agents Solve Realistic and Time-Consuming Tasks?cited by 155
- 2025AgenTracer: Who Is Inducing Failure in the LLM Agentic Systems?cited by 105
- 2024Visibility into AI Agentscited by 77
- 2025Authenticated Delegation and Authorized AI Agentscited by 63
- 2025A Survey of LLM-Driven AI Agent Communication: Protocols, Security Risks, and Defense Countermeasurescited by 54
- 2015A Modification of the Halpern-Pearl Definition of Causalitycited by 47
- 2024AgentOps: Enabling Observability of LLM Agentscited by 46
- 2017Practical Whole-System Provenance Capturecited by 19
- 2025Automatic Failure Attribution and Critical Step Prediction Method for Multi-Agent Systems Based on Causal Inferencecited by 18
- 2026Causal Agent Replay: Counterfactual Attribution for LLM-Agent Failurescited by 18
- 2026CausalFlow: Causal Attribution and Counterfactual Repair for LLM Agent Failurescited by 17
- 2025BlockA2A: Towards Secure and Verifiable Agent-to-Agent Interoperabilitycited by 14
- 2026Auditable Agentscited by 14
- 2013Graded Causation and Defaultscited by 13
- 2021On Blame Attribution for Accountable Multi-Agent Sequential Decision Makingcited by 13
- 2025Taming Uncertainty via Automation: Observing, Analyzing, and Optimizing Agentic AI Systemscited by 12
- 2019Blameworthiness in Multi-Agent Settingscited by 11
- 2017Engineering Record And Replay For Deployability: Extended Technical Reportcited by 5
- 2026Propagating Unsafe Actions in LLM Controlled Multi-Robot Collaboration via Single Robot Compromisecited by 5
- 2015Program Actions as Actual Causes: A Building Block for Accountabilitycited by 4
- 2025The Aegis Protocol: A Foundational Security Framework for Autonomous AI Agentscited by 4
- 2018Automated Verification of Accountability in Security Protocolscited by 3
- 2024Assessing the Auditability of AI-integrating Systems: A Framework and Learning Analytics Case Studycited by 3
- 2024AuditMAI: Towards An Infrastructure for Continuous AI Auditingcited by 2
- 2025Higher-Order Responsibilitycited by 2
- 2026Counterfactual Reasoning for Causal Responsibility Attribution in Probabilistic Multi-Agent Systemscited by 2
- 2026The Verification Tax: Fundamental Limits of AI Auditing in the Rare-Error Regimecited by 1
- 2026VCT: A Verifiable Transcript System for LLM Conversationscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.