Attributing Agent Failures to Their History Needs an Executed Counterfactual: Toward a Reporting Standard
Published explanations of why long-horizon agents fail are commonly taxonomies labeled over completed trajectories: a judge reads a transcript and names the failure. We argue that a claim attributing an agent's behavior to its history should carry intervention-verified evidence, per instance or via…
Authors: Egor Pakhomov , Erik Nijkamp
View a PDF of the paper titled Attributing Agent Failures to Their History Needs an Executed Counterfactual: Toward a Reporting Standard, by Egor Pakhomov and 1 other authors
View PDF
HTML (experimental)
Abstract: Published explanations of why long-horizon agents fail are commonly taxonomies labeled over completed trajectories: a judge reads a transcript and names the failure. We argue that a claim attributing an agent's behavior to its history should carry intervention-verified evidence, per instance or via a validated estimator: freeze an executable mid-trajectory state, alter only the history the agent sees, and continue - executed rather than inferred from the transcript, at a state whose restoration has been measured, with a replay certificate matched to the estimand. Each of the four manipulation classes we name has a precedent, and several methods already execute interventions from checkpoints, re-executed prefixes or recorded conversation states (for example DoVer, REFLECT, Min et al., Who&When Pro, Causal Agent Replay), but none reports a measured replay certificate. Two cautionary measurements, neither applying the standard, follow: a carrier taxonomy whose "concentration" could not be separated from benchmark construction (adjusted odds ratio 1.15, interval crossing 1), and hash-identical snapshots that, restored into identically seeded processes, agreed with one another in 24 of 24 states while differing from the live continuation in 9 and 20 of 24. Restoring the captured position of a random stream made all 24 agree with the live run.
Comments:
Accepted at the IAB Workshop (Interpreting Agent Behavior) at NeurIPS 2026 (non-archival). 20 pages
Subjects:
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as:
arXiv:2611.05650 [cs.AI]
(or
arXiv:2611.05650v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2611.05650
Focus to learn more
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
Submission history
From: Egor Pakhomov [ view email ]
[v1]
Tue, 3 Nov 2026 21:33:48 UTC (52 KB)
Full-text links:
Access Paper:
View a PDF of the paper titled Attributing Agent Failures to Their History Needs an Executed Counterfactual: Toward a Reporting Standard, by Egor Pakhomov and 1 other authors
View PDF
HTML (experimental)
TeX Source
view license
Additional Features
Audio Summary
Current browse context:
cs.AI
< prev
next >
new
recent
| 2026-11
Change to browse by:
cs
References & Citations
SciX
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
export BibTeX citation
Loading...
BibTeX formatted citation
loading...
Data provided by:
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer ( What is the Explorer? )
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers ( What is Connected Papers? )
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps ( What is Litmaps? )
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations ( What are Smart Citations? )
Code, Data, Media
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv ( What is alphaXiv? )
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers ( What is CatalyzeX? )
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub ( What is DagsHub? )
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub ( What is GotitPub? )
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face ( What is Huggingface? )
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast ( What is ScienceCast? )
Demos
Demos
Replicate Toggle
Replicate ( What is Replicate? )
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces ( What is Spaces? )
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI ( What is TXYZ.AI? )
Related Papers
Recommenders and Search Tools
Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower ( What are Influence Flowers? )
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender ( What is CORE? )
Author
Venue
Institution
Topic
About arXivLabs
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? |
Disable MathJax ( What is MathJax? )
本文内容由 ai007 从公开渠道聚合,版权归原作者所有。若原文已删除或变更, 以原文站为准;本站存档仅为便于查阅而保留。