Structuring multi-agent governance using the CASE enterprise control architecture combined with LLM constitutional rules prevents the decay of agent epistemic integrity during prolonged multi-agent consensus negotiations.
Adversarial Debate Score
51% survival rate under critique
Expert panel critique
Independent views, each critiquing the hypothesis on its own — the score rewards genuine disagreement and discounts consensus.
Supporting Research Papers
- The CASE Framework: A Multi-Disciplinary Control Architecture for Governing Enterprise Agentic AI
Enterprises are deploying autonomous AI agents faster than they can govern them, and prevailing approaches stretch a single discipline, typically DevSecOps built for deterministic automation, across e...
- LLM Constitutional Multi-Agent Governance
Large Language Models (LLMs) can generate persuasive influence strategies that shift cooperative behavior in multi-agent populations, but a critical question remains: does the resulting cooperation re...
- Position: A Three-Layer Probabilistic Assume-Guarantee Architecture Is Structurally Required for Safe LLM Agent Deployment
This position paper argues that enforcing LLM agent safety within a single abstraction layer is not merely suboptimal but categorically insufficient for deployed LLM agents -- a structural consequence...
- AGENTSAFE: A Unified Framework for Ethical Assurance and Governance in Agentic AI
The rapid deployment of large language model (LLM)-based agents introduces a new class of risks, driven by their capacity for autonomous planning, multi-step tool integration, and emergent interaction...
- Emergent Collusion in Long-Horizon LLM Agent Interaction
LLM agents are increasingly deployed in collaborative settings, yet long-term interaction may give rise to undesirable coordination. We study the emergence of collusion in a long-horizon multi-agent e...
Literature Assessment
An LLM's reading of the literature — not computational verification.
Evidence supports governance structures but highlights potential drawbacks.
Method: literature_meta · Result: inconclusive
Formal Verification
Z3 checks whether the hypothesis is internally consistent, not whether it is empirically true.