Synthesizing across four constraint-bound engineering domains, agentic AI trustworthiness is shown to be a single problem, with a path outlined toward a reusable, cross-domain assurance framework analogous to the graded certification regimes used by mature safety-critical engineering fields.
Abstract
Agentic artificial intelligence systems, capable of autonomous perception, planning, tool use, and multi-step action, are increasingly proposed for critical engineering domains where decisions carry physical, operational, or economic consequences. This survey addresses a gap in current literature by treating trustworthiness, whether agentic behavior can be verified, audited, and trusted under the constraints that engineering practice actually requires, as a first-class engineering property, rather than evaluating agentic AI by task capability alone. The study adopts a trustworthiness model organized around five cross-cutting dimensions: safety and constraint satisfaction; robustness and reliability; transparency and interpretability; accountability and auditability; and privacy and security. This is mapped onto an agentic assurance workflow spanning perception through audit. Building on this foundation, agentic systems architectures, threats, concrete trust mechanisms, and quantitative metrics are surveyed for direct application in agentic systems development and evaluation. These principles are then examined across four constraint-bound engineering domains: power systems, autonomous vehicles/robotics/UAVs, high-performance computing, and communication networks, identifying recurring design patterns, shared failure modes, and domain-specific gaps. Synthesizing across those domains, agentic AI trustworthiness is shown to be a single problem, with a path outlined toward a reusable, cross-domain assurance framework analogous to the graded certification regimes used by mature safety-critical engineering fields.
It is argued that agentic AI should be approached as a socio-technical design problem, where interfaces, oversight mechanisms, and evaluation practices are as critical as algorithms.
Timothy Merritt, Alejandro Jarabo-Peñas, Juan Bravo-Arrabal et al.· 0 citations
It is asserted that trustworthiness is a systems property, not a single algorithmic feature, and that realising it requires coordinated advances in explainability, uncertainty quantification, human–AI interaction design, failure detection, and domain-specific data governance.
Infrastructure compliance enforcement is increasingly considered for agentic AI systems that can plan, act and self-correct over many steps. A structured examination of the literature reveals several significant gaps. Multi-agent compliance pipelines have been architecturally proposed in several works but none report a...
Saleha Soudagar, V. Rajpurohit, Arati Shahapurkar et al.· 2026 4th International Confe...· 0 citations
Charting these challenges provides a roadmap toward trustworthy autonomous agent deployment: security must become a verifiable property of the architectures, protocols, and runtimes that govern agent behavior, rather than an optional layer of guidance.
This survey synthesizes 257 papers spanning agent evaluation, software assurance, cyber-physical systems, runtime monitoring, and regulatory guidance in order to characterize the validation problem for agentic systems, and concludes with a lifecycle-oriented research agenda centered on bounded-autonomy specifications,...
Fabio Orazio Mirto, L. D'Agati, Giuseppe Tricomi et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
A comprehensive framework for the design, evaluation, and responsible deployment of Agentic AI is proposed, emphasizing safety, explainability, human-in-the-loop supervision, and ethical compliance and aims to maximize the benefits of Agentic AI while minimizing potential risks.
Nitin S. Shrirao, Dnyaneshwar S. Jadhav, Sarita B. Patil· Recent Trends in Mathematics· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.