Artificial Intelligence · 24.08.2026, 05:31 UTC
Testing and Evaluation of Agentic AI Systems In Military Command and Control
| Schweregrad | info |
|---|---|
| Kategorie | Artificial Intelligence |
| Quelle | arXiv cs.AI ↗ |
| Veröffentlicht | 24.08.2026 UTC |
Sicherheitsmeldung mit Schweregrad noch nicht bewertet. Technische Details im Tab „Originaltext“; empfohlene Schritte in der Checkliste.
arXiv:2608.20597v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic AI systems are being procured for military command and control (C2) under public commitments to rigorous testing and human oversight. Whether such commitments can be discharged depends on their supporting assurance case, which requires three elements: claims specifying the conditions for acceptability, evidence bearing on those claims, and an argument connecting the two. Through a structured review of 240 documented Testing and Evaluation (T&E) practices, spanning eight evaluation dimensions and three lifecycle stages, we identify eight assumptions that established methods make about their test article, grouped into four clusters: system specifiability, stability, composability, and supervisability. Agentic properties weaken all eight assumptions. This erosion affects the argument connecting evidence to claims, not the claims or evidence themselves. As a result, test results may satisfy process requirements, but they do not warrant the inference from tested to fielded behavior. We derive ten assurance claims for the first three assumption clusters and assess whether current and emerging methods can address each, mapping operational consequences through five C2 scenarios. Supervisability is identified but not assessed here, since evidencing it depends on system stability results and human factors T&E methods beyond the present scope. The documented record does not support broad claims about system-level behavior, but narrower claims remain recoverable in principle, contingent on mature methods: bounded mission …
Maßnahmen
⬇ Als MarkdownVerwandte Beiträge
- info Preference-Based Self-Distillation: Beyond KL Matching via Reward Regularization
- info RefusalGuard: Geometry-Preserving Fine-Tuning for Safety in LLMs
- info Complete Cyclic Subtask Graphs for Tool-Using LLM Agents: Flexibility, Cost, and Bottlenecks in Long-Horizon Workflows
- info AutoOR: Scalably Post-training LLMs to Autoformulate Operations Research Problems