Pekka Abrahamsson

Engineering a Governance-Aware AI Sandbox: Design, Implementation, and Lessons Learned

Collaborative AI experimentation in industry-academia requires environments that support rapid trials while maintaining controlled access, organisational isolation, and traceable workflows. Although interest in AI sandboxes is increasing, practical guidance on designing and building governance-aware experimentation platforms remains limited. This work designs and operationalizes a governance-aware, multi-tenant AI sandbox that supports structured experimentation and produces reusable evaluation evidence across stakeholders. The sandbox was developed in an industry-academia ecosystem using iteratively validated requirements gathered from industrial partners. The solution adopts a layered reference architecture that separates a multi-tenant presentation layer from a backend control plane and isolates execution and data management concerns into dedicated layers. The sandbox supports governed onboarding, project-based collaboration, controlled access to AI services, and traceable experimentation through approval workflows and audit logging. By structuring experiment context and governance decisions as persistent records, the sandbox enables evaluation evidence to be reused and compared across projects and stakeholders. The development experience yields lessons learned and practical considerations that inform deployment and future evolution of governance-aware sandbox platforms.

TERE4AI: A Knowledge Graph-Based Tool for Generating EU AI Act Compliant Requirements

AI Sandbox: Technical Report

Collaborative AI experimentation across industry and academia requires platforms that enable rapid prototyping while preserving controlled access, tenant separation, and transparent workflows. Despite growing interest in AI sandboxes, there is still limited practical guidance on how to design and implement platforms that integrate experimentation capabilities with governance requirements. This work presents the design and implementation of a governance-aware, multi-tenant AI sandbox for structured experimentation and the generation of reusable evaluation evidence across projects and stakeholder groups. The sandbox was developed within an industry-academia collaboration based on requirements that were iteratively refined with industrial partners. Its reference architecture separates the multi-tenant user interface from the backend control plane and places execution and data-management functions in dedicated layers. The platform supports governed user onboarding, project-centered collaboration, managed access to AI services, approval workflows, audit logging, and traceable experimentation. Experiment configurations, contextual information, and governance decisions are stored as persistent records, allowing evidence and outcomes to be compared and reused across projects. The development process provides practical lessons for deploying and extending governance-aware AI sandbox platforms in collaborative research and industrial environments.

LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems for Code Generation: A Multi-Vocal Literature Review

Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled multi-agent systems to perform autonomous code generation for complex tasks. Despite the recent growth in research and industrial applications in this area, there is little work on synthesizing evidence from both academic and industrial sources to capture the current state of research on LLM-based multi-agent systems for code generation. To this end, we conducted a Multi-Vocal Literature Review (MLR), combining insights from both academia and industry, including peer-reviewed studies and grey literature. The aim of this study is to systematically synthesize and analyze existing knowledge on LLM-based multi-agent systems for code generation. Specifically, the review examines the motivations for their use, employed benchmarks and models, key challenges, proposed solutions, and potential directions for future research. We selected and reviewed 114 studies, and the key findings are: 1) the identified reasons for adopting multi-agent systems for code generation were classified into nine categories; 2) the models and evaluation benchmarks utilized across the studies were systematically analyzed to provide a structured overview of commonly adopted LLM configurations and assessment practices; 3) the reported challenges and corresponding solutions were synthesized into six main categories and 26 subcategories; and 4) future research directions were identified and organized into six main categories and 18 subcategories. The results of this MLR will assist researchers and practitioners in pursuing further studies and supporting the real-world adoption of multi-agent systems in industrial settings.

Navigating Compliance

Agentic Frameworks for Reasoning Tasks: An Empirical Study

Recent advances in agentic frameworks have enabled AI agents to perform complex reasoning and decision-making. However, evidence comparing their reasoning performance, efficiency, and practical suitability remains limited. To address this gap, we empirically evaluate 22 widely used agentic frameworks across three reasoning benchmarks: BBH, GSM8K, and ARC. The frameworks were selected from 1,200 GitHub repositories collected between January 2023 and July 2025 and organized into a taxonomy based on architectural design. We evaluated them under a unified setting, measuring reasoning accuracy, execution time, computational cost, and cross-benchmark consistency. Our results show that 19 of the 22 frameworks completed all three benchmarks. Among these, 12 showed stable performance, with mean accuracy of 74.6-75.9%, execution time of 4-6 seconds per task, and cost of 0.14-0.18 cents per task. Poorer results were mainly caused by orchestration problems rather than reasoning limits. For example, Camel failed to complete BBH after 11 days because of uncontrolled context growth, while Upsonic consumed USD 1,434 in one day because repeated extraction failures triggered costly retries. AutoGen and Mastra also exhausted API quotas through iterative interactions that increased prompt length without improving results. We also found a sharp drop in mathematical reasoning. Mean accuracy on GSM8K was 44.35%, compared with 89.80% on BBH and 89.56% on ARC. Overall, this study provides the first large-scale empirical comparison of agentic frameworks for reasoning-intensive software engineering tasks and shows that framework selection should prioritize orchestration quality, especially memory control, failure handling, and cost management.