Evaluating Bounded Autonomy in Regulated Agentic AI: A Diagnostic Harness with Constitutional Rewards, Escalation Labels, and Runtime Governance
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance also fits: Software engineering coding agents
Abstract (arXiv)
We propose RegLLM, a diagnostic harness for bounded autonomy in regulated agentic workflows. It instruments six trustworthiness signals: citation validity, source grounding, schema compliance, escalation correctness, constitutional alignment, and unsafe-action rate. Signals are distinguished by their source of supervision: programmatic verifiers, task-level escalation labels, or AI-judge scores. A deterministic runtime supervisor blocks ungrounded answers and forces escalation, logging interventions. The same domain constitution informs evaluation, training rewards, and serving guardrails. Task-level should-escalate labels make the act-versus-defer decision a measurable training signal. We demonstrate the harness at smoke scale. An offline reference run (n=12) lifts escalation recall from 0 to 0.67 and reduces unsafe-action rate from 0.33 to 0.08 when governance is enabled. Two single-GPU Qwen2.5-3B LoRA/DPO pilots (n=8, same seed and evaluation split) expose substantial variation: nominally identical RL-base configurations yield task success of 0.25 versus 0.12 and escalation recall of 1.0 versus 0.5. An answer-quality adapter changes recall from 1.0 to 0.5 in Run A, but from 0.5 to 1.0 in Run B. An escalation-aware variant produces no measurable change in Run B. These small pilots do not establish reliable adapter effects or production readiness. Their contribution is diagnostic: configuration variance can overwhelm apparent tuning effects on bounded-autonomy metrics, motivating larger evaluation sets and repeated runs.
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 16 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2026.
Builds on
16 of 21 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2025PSG-Agent: Personality-Aware Safety Guardrail for LLM-based Agents28 Sep
- 2025AGrail: A Lifelong Agent Guardrail with Effective and Adaptive Safety Detection17 Feb
Other references · 14
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
- 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 9,379
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
- 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,912
- 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,080
- 2024Tulu 3: Pushing Frontiers in Open Language Model Post-Trainingcited by 1,053
- 2023BloombergGPT: A Large Language Model for Financecited by 939
- 2019FinBERT: Financial Sentiment Analysis with Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 385
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Beyond Task Success: An Evidence-Synthesis Framework for Evaluating, Governing, and Orchestrating Agentic AI
- 2026Autonomy and Agency in Agentic AI: Architectural Tactics for Regulated Contexts
- 2026Behavioral Governance for Autonomous AI Agents: The AgentBound Framework
- 2026The Digital Apprentice: A Framework for Human-Directed Agentic AI Development
- 2026Intelligence as Managed Autonomy: Failure, Escalation, and Governance for Agentic AI Systems
- 2026SARC: A Governance-by-Architecture Framework for Agentic AI Systems
- 2026Runtime Governance for Agentic AI: Action-Boundary Control with Trusted Provenance and Fail-Closed Execution
- 2025Evaluating LLM Agent Adherence to Hierarchical Safety Principles: A Lightweight Benchmark for Probing Foundational Controllability Components