关于AI智能体的可审计性声明
摘要
本文将Auditable Agents框架的策略可检查性维度扩展到关于AI智能体的声明上,定义了何时一条声明是可审计的,并证明独立的记录覆盖、逐操作的授权绑定以及完整性是验证的必要条件,同时为运营方和标准制定者提供了实用的指导。
arXiv:2610.07459v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Organizations make claims about their AI agents: a person approves every external email, every action is logged, an evaluation shows the agent is safe to deploy. Article 12 of the EU AI Act requires high-risk systems to allow the automatic recording of events but does not say which records settle a given claim. The position is one sentence: to be checked, a claim about an agent must first name its policy, its scope, the records that would settle it, and who writes them. Adapting the preconditions of an assurance engagement, we call a claim auditable when these elements and a decision rule are fixed before any verdict and the records are obtainable. This extends the Policy Checkability dimension of our Auditable Agents framework from single actions to claims. Agents add three conditions: coverage by an independent record, authorization bound to each action's arguments, and completeness beyond integrity. Under an explicit model, we prove that support is impossible without each wherever its hypotheses hold. A claim-check table applies the method to six common claims, anchored in current NIST, IETF, and OWASP drafts. A worked case follows one claim through five evidence states. We close with a practice box and steps for operators, buyers, auditors, and standard setters.
查看缓存全文
缓存时间: 2026/10/08 12:27
# Auditable Claims about AI Agents Source: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.07459](https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.07459) [View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.07459) > Abstract:Organizations make claims about their AI agents: a person approves every external email, every action is logged, an evaluation shows the agent is safe to deploy\. Article 12 of the EU AI Act requires high\-risk systems to allow the automatic recording of events but does not say which records settle a given claim\. The position is one sentence: to be checked, a claim about an agent must first name its policy, its scope, the records that would settle it, and who writes them\. Adapting the preconditions of an assurance engagement, we call a claim auditable when these elements and a decision rule are fixed before any verdict and the records are obtainable\. This extends the Policy Checkability dimension of our Auditable Agents framework from single actions to claims\. Agents add three conditions: coverage by an independent record, authorization bound to each action's arguments, and completeness beyond integrity\. Under an explicit model, we prove that support is impossible without each wherever its hypotheses hold\. A claim\-check table applies the method to six common claims, anchored in current NIST, IETF, and OWASP drafts\. A worked case follows one claim through five evidence states\. We close with a practice box and steps for operators, buyers, auditors, and standard setters\. ## Submission history From: Xiyang Hu \[[view email](https://arxiv.org/show-email/4966f27e/2610.07459)\] **\[v1\]**Mon, 5 Oct 2026 22:11:11 UTC \(945 KB\)
相似文章
AgentAudit:一个用于 AI 代理全生命周期信任评估的开放、可扩展框架
AgentAudit 是一个开放且可扩展的框架,用于评估 AI 代理在能力、基础、安全和行为维度的全生命周期,实现精确的故障归因并突出不同语言模型之间的可信度差异。
其他人在AI可审计性方面也遇到困难了吗?
作者描述了一个AI可审计性的挑战,其中代理的决策缺乏与活跃策略版本的可追溯性,并就为AI代理决策构建有效决策路径寻求建议。
AI 代理执行了操作。一旦出错,谁来负责?
一篇关于生产环境中 AI 代理行为问责的评论文章,主张提示词不等于权限,通过强制限制、指定决策人、最小化访问权限、安全重试机制和不可篡改的审计记录,才能让代理获得更大的自主权变得可行。
AI代理部署中的责任差距增长速度快于能力差距,却鲜有人提及
文章强调了AI代理部署中日益扩大的责任差距——审计追踪不足,并主张建立带有可验证记录的基础设施级执行治理。文中提到了W3在Avalanche上使用计算证明的解决方案。
你如何真正知道你的 AI 代理做了它所说的事?
本文讨论了验证 AI 代理行为的挑战,并倡导使用不可变的收据来确保信任,并区分错误决策和不存在的决策。