arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.34313

ControlScope: Workflow Revision and Reliability in LLM Agents

Jingjie Ning·Xueqi Li·Yibo Kong·Dongting Li
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

How much of a running workflow should a language model agent revise? ControlScope compares continuing generated code, editing the next tool call's data arguments, and replacing the unfinished workflow from the same public execution state. The nested permissions separate available repairs from the actions an agent selects. We evaluate one-time and repeated reviews across filesystem tasks, ALFWorld, and AppWorld. Across two source programs per task and three reasoning-reviewer draws on 20 filesystem tasks, FULL completes 15-16 tasks versus 13 for KEEP; across four fast draws it completes 10-13 versus 13. Fresh student-record confirmation reproduces a batch-read repair. ALFWorld fast panels yield KEEP/ARG/FULL scores of 85/86/87 on 87 tasks across 52 scenes and 134/134/127 on 134 tasks across four scenes; reasoning on the 87-task cohort also yields 85/86/87 with substantial review cost. An AppWorld V1 official-test panel of 585 task instances from 195 scenario templates shows small net differences. Frozen replays expose viable agent-written replacements interrupted by later revision in two failed file-organization runs. An offline source-trajectory midpoint comparison shows later reviews completing an insufficient repair. Five-call protection saves 19.4% of logged model output and loses one success across 20 fresh source runs. An argument-only shortcut shows that the broader sampled policy can overlook a cheaper successful edit available in both operation sets. These outcomes tie repair access to actual choices and subsequent execution.

Explore related subjects

cs.AIcs.CLcs.SE

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jingjie Ning, Xueqi Li, Yibo Kong, Dongting Li. 2026-09-28. ControlScope: Workflow Revision and Reliability in LLM Agents. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.34313

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

FlexQuant: Elastic Quantization Framework for Locally Hosted LLM on Edge Devices

Deploying LLMs on edge devices presents serious technical challenges. Memory elasticity is crucial for edge devices with unified memory, where memory is shared and fluctuates dynamically. Existing solutions suffer from either poor transition granularity or high storage costs. We propose FlexQuant, a novel elasticity framework that generates an ensemble of quantized models, providing an elastic hosting solution with 31x more deployment options, 15x granularity improvement, and 10x storage reduction compared to SoTA methods. FlexQuant works with most quantization methods and creates a family of trade-off options under various storage limits through our pruning method. It brings great performance and flexibility to the edge deployment of LLMs.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Rethinking Prospect Theory for LLMs: Revealing the Instability of Decision-Making under Epistemic Uncertainty

Real-world decision-making often involves uncertainty expressed in linguistic rather than numerical terms, and Prospect Theory (PT) provides a classic framework for modeling human behavior under such uncertainty. Although recent studies have developed frameworks to estimate PT parameters for Large Language Models (LLMs), few have examined whether PT itself adequately describes LLM decision-making behavior. To address these gaps, we develop a streamlined workflow grounded in a classic behavioral economics experimental paradigm. First, we estimate PT parameters and evaluate how well the resulting model captures LLM decision-making behavior. We then derive probability mappings for epistemic markers in the same context and inject them into prompts to examine the stability of PT parameters under linguistic uncertainty. Our findings suggest that PT does not consistently provide a reliable account of LLM decision-making across models, and that its application to LLMs is likely sensitive to epistemic uncertainty. The findings caution against the deployment of PT-based frameworks in real-world applications where epistemic ambiguity is prevalent, giving valuable insights in behaviour interpretation and future alignment direction for LLM decision-making.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Enabling Regulatory Multi-Agent Collaboration: Architecture, Challenges, and Solutions

Large language models (LLMs)-empowered autonomous agents are transforming both digital and physical environments by enabling adaptive, multi-agent collaboration. While these agents offer significant opportunities across domains such as finance, healthcare, and smart manufacturing, their unpredictable behaviors and heterogeneous capabilities pose substantial governance and accountability challenges. In this paper, we propose a blockchain-enabled layered architecture for regulatory agent collaboration, comprising an agent layer, an off-chain computation layer, and an on-chain anchoring layer. Within this framework, we design three key modules: (i) an agent behavior tracing and arbitration module for automated accountability, (ii) a dynamic reputation evaluation module for trust assessment in collaborative scenarios, and (iii) a malicious behavior forecasting module for early detection of adversarial activities. Our approach establishes a systematic foundation for trustworthy, resilient, and scalable regulatory mechanisms in large-scale agent ecosystems. Finally, we discuss the future research directions for blockchain-enabled regulatory frameworks in multi-agent systems.

cs.AI↗