Large language models display a peculiar form of inconsistency: they "know" the correct answer but fail to act on it. In human philosophy, this tension between global judgment and local impulse is called akrasia, or weakness of will. We propose akrasia as a foundational concept for analyzing inconsistency and goal drift in agentic AI systems. To operationalize it, we introduce a preliminary version of the Akrasia Benchmark, currently a structured set of prompting conditions (Baseline [B], Synonym [S], Temporal [T], and Temptation [X]) that measures when a model's local response contradicts its own prior commitments. The benchmark enables quantitative comparison of "self-control" across model families, decoding strategies, and temptation types. Beyond single-model evaluation, we outline how micro-level akrasia may compound into macro-level instability in multi-agent systems that may be interpreted as "scheming" or deliberate misalignment. By reframing inconsistency as weakness of will, this work connects agentic behavior to classical theories of agency and provides an empirical bridge between philosophy, psychology, and the emerging science of agentic AI.

Abstract--The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) is rapidly accelerating the development of autonomous multi-agent systems (MAS), paving the way for the Internet of Agents. However, traditional centralized MAS architectures present significant challenges, including single points of failure, vulnerability to censorship, inherent scalability limitations, and critical trust issues. We propose a novel Decentralized Multi-Agent System (DMAS) architecture designed to overcome these fundamental problems by enabling trust-aware, scalable, and censorship-resistant interactions among autonomous agents. Our DMAS features a decentralized agent runtime underpinned by a blockchain-based architecture. We formalize a trust-aware communication protocol that leverages cryptographic primitives and on-chain operations to provide security properties: verifiable interaction cycles, communication integrity, authenticity, non-repudiation, and conditional confidentiality, which we further substantiate through a comprehensive security analysis. The rapid advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) [1]-[4] have opened unprecedented avenues for creating highly autonomous and intelligent agents. These LLM-augmented agents possess remarkable capabilities in understanding natural language, performing complex reasoning, planning intricate sequences of actions, and engaging in sophisticated communication.

Real-world systems ranging from airline routes to cryptocurrency transfers are naturally modelled as dynamic graphs whose topology changes over time. Conventional benchmarks judge dynamic-graph learners by a handful of task-specific scores, yet seldom ask whether the embeddings themselves remain a truthful, interpretable reflection of the evolving network. W e formalize this requirement as representation integrity and derive a family of indexes that measure how closely embedding changes follow graph changes. Three synthetic scenarios--Gradual Merge, Abrupt Move, and Periodic Re-wiring--are used to screen forty-two candidate indexes. Based on which we recommend one index that passes all of our theoretical and empirical tests. In particular, this validated metric consistently ranks the provably stable UASE and IPP models highest. W e then use this index to do a comparative study on representation integrity of common dynamic graph learning models. This study exposes the scenario-specific strengths of neural methods, and shows a strong positive rank correlation with one-step link-prediction AUC. The proposed integrity framework, therefore, offers a task-agnostic and interpretable evaluation tool for dynamic-graph representation quality, providing more explicit guidance for model selection and future architecture design.

The AI trustworthiness crisis threatens to derail the artificial intelligence revolution, with regulatory barriers, security vulnerabilities, and accountability gaps preventing deployment in critical domains. Current AI systems operate on opaque data structures that lack the audit trails, provenance tracking, or explainability required by emerging regulations like the EU AI Act. We propose an artifact-centric AI agent paradigm where behavior is driven by persistent, verifiable data artifacts rather than ephemeral tasks, solving the trustworthiness problem at the data architecture level. Central to this approach is the Multimodal Artifact File Format (MAIF), an AI-native container embedding semantic representations, cryptographic provenance, and granular access controls. MAIF transforms data from passive storage into active trust enforcement, making every AI operation inherently auditable. Our production-ready implementation demonstrates ultra-high-speed streaming (2,720.7 MB/s), optimized video processing (1,342 MB/s), and enterprise-grade security. Novel algorithms for cross-modal attention, semantic compression, and cryptographic binding achieve up to 225 compression while maintaining semantic fidelity. Advanced security features include stream-level access control, real-time tamper detection, and behavioral anomaly analysis with minimal overhead. This approach directly addresses the regulatory, security, and accountability challenges preventing AI deployment in sensitive domains, offering a viable path toward trustworthy AI systems at scale.

The transition to autonomous material systems necessitates adaptive control methodologies to maximize structural longevity. This study frames the self-healing process as a Reinforcement Learning (RL) problem within a Markov Decision Process (MDP), enabling agents to autonomously derive optimal policies that efficiently balance structural integrity maintenance against finite resource consumption. A comparative evaluation of discrete-action (Q-learning, DQN) and continuous-action (TD3) agents in a stochastic simulation environment revealed that RL controllers significantly outperform heuristic baselines, achieving near-complete material recovery. Crucially, the TD3 agent utilizing continuous dosage control demonstrated superior convergence speed and stability, underscoring the necessity of fine-grained, proportional actuation in dynamic self-healing applications.

Peer review serves as the gatekeeper of science, yet the surge in submissions and widespread adoption of large language models (LLMs) in scholarly evaluation present unprecedented challenges. While recent work has focused on using LLMs to improve review efficiency, unchecked deficient reviews from both human experts and AI systems threaten to systematically undermine academic integrity. To address this issue, we introduce ReviewGuard, an automated system for detecting and categorizing deficient reviews through a four-stage LLM-driven framework: data collection from ICLR and NeurIPS on OpenReview, GPT-4.1 annotation with human validation, synthetic data augmentation yielding 6,634 papers with 24,657 real and 46,438 synthetic reviews, and fine-tuning of encoder-based models and open-source LLMs. Feature analysis reveals that deficient reviews exhibit lower rating scores, higher self-reported confidence, reduced structural complexity, and more negative sentiment than sufficient reviews. AI-generated text detection shows dramatic increases in AI-authored reviews since ChatGPT's emergence. Mixed training with synthetic and real data substantially improves detection performance - for example, Qwen 3-8B achieves recall of 0.6653 and F1 of 0.7073, up from 0.5499 and 0.5606 respectively. This study presents the first LLM-driven system for detecting deficient peer reviews, providing evidence to inform AI governance in peer review. Code, prompts, and data are available at https://github.com/haoxuan-unt2024/ReviewGuard

An ever increasing number of high-stake decisions are made or assisted by automated systems employing brittle artificial intelligence technology. There is a substantial risk that some of these decision induce harm to people, by infringing their well-being or their fundamental human rights. The state-of-the-art in AI systems makes little effort with respect to appropriate documentation of the decision process. This obstructs the ability to trace what went into a decision, which in turn is a prerequisite to any attempt of reconstructing a responsibility chain. Specifically, such traceability is linked to a documentation that will stand up in court when determining the cause of some AI-based decision that inadvertently or intentionally violates the law. This paper takes a radical, yet practical, approach to this problem, by enforcing the documentation of each and every component that goes into the training or inference of an automated decision. As such, it presents the first running workflow supporting the generation of tamper-proof, verifiable and exhaustive traces of AI decisions. In doing so, we expand the Decision Bill of Material (DBOM) concept (Wenzel et al. 2024) into an effective running workflow leveraging confidential computing technology. We demonstrate the inner workings of the workflow in the development of an app to tell poisonous and edible mushrooms apart, meant as a playful example of high-stake decision support.

Assurance for artificial intelligence (AI) systems remains fragmented across software supply-chain security, adversarial machine learning, and governance documentation. Existing transparency mechanisms - including Model Cards, Datasheets, and Software Bills of Materials (SBOMs) - advance provenance reporting but rarely provide verifiable, machine-readable evidence of model security. This paper introduces the AI Risk Scanning (AIRS) Framework, a threat-model-based, evidence-generating framework designed to operationalize AI assurance. The AIRS Framework evolved through three progressive pilot studies - Smurf (AIBOM schema design), OPAL (operational validation), and Pilot C (AIRS) - that reframed AI documentation from descriptive disclosure toward measurable, evidence-bound verification. The framework aligns its assurance fields to the MITRE ATLAS adversarial ML taxonomy and automatically produces structured artifacts capturing model integrity, packaging and serialization safety, structural adapters, and runtime behaviors. Currently, the AIRS Framework is scoped to provide model-level assurances for LLMs, but it could be expanded to include other modalities and cover system-level threats (e.g. application-layer abuses, tool-calling). A proof-of-concept on a quantized GPT-OSS-20B model demonstrates enforcement of safe loader policies, per-shard hash verification, and contamination and backdoor probes executed under controlled runtime conditions. Comparative analysis with SBOM standards of SPDX 3.0 and CycloneDX 1.6 reveals alignment on identity and evaluation metadata, but identifies critical gaps in representing AI-specific assurance fields. The AIRS Framework thus extends SBOM practice to the AI domain by coupling threat modeling with automated, auditable evidence generation, providing a principled foundation for standardized, trustworthy, and machine-verifiable AI risk documentation.

This study focuses on understanding the complex dynamics between humans and AI systems by analyzing user reviews. While previous research has explored various aspects of human-AI interaction, such as user perceptions and ethical considerations, there remains a gap in understanding the specific concerns and challenges users face. By using a lexical approach to analyze 55,968 online reviews from G2.com, Producthunt.com, and Trustpilot.com, this preliminary research aims to analyze human-AI interaction. Initial results from factor analysis reveal key factors influencing these interactions. The study aims to provide deeper insights into these factors through content analysis, contributing to the development of more user-centric AI systems. The findings are expected to enhance our understanding of human-AI interaction and inform future AI technology and user experience improvements.

Low latency event-selection (trigger) algorithms are essential components of Large Hadron Collider (LHC) operation. Modern machine learning (ML) models have shown great offline performance as classifiers and could improve trigger performance, thereby improving downstream physics analyses. However, inference on such large models does not satisfy the $40\text{MHz}$ online latency constraint at the LHC. In this work, we propose \texttt{PHAZE}, a novel framework built on cryptographic techniques like hashing and zero-knowledge machine learning (zkML) to achieve low latency inference, via a certifiable, early-exit mechanism from an arbitrarily large baseline model. We lay the foundations for such a framework to achieve nanosecond-order latency and discuss its inherent advantages, such as built-in anomaly detection, within the scope of LHC triggers, as well as its potential to enable a dynamic low-level trigger in the future.