Skip to content

CHARLES: Continuous Homeostatic Adversarial Resilience through Learning and Epistemic Sifting

Oct 2026 · British Journal of Contemporary Research · 6 references

Abstract

The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) and reinforcement learning (RL) in cybersecurity introduces the possibility of autonomous cyber agents capable of observing an environment, learning from interaction, and selecting sequential actions with limited human intervention.This development creates a challenge for conventional defensive strategies, which frequently depend on relatively stable system configurations, predefined detection rules, and human-led response processes.Cyber deception and moving target defense (MTD) provide mechanisms for increasing uncertainty and changing the environment encountered by an attacker, while game theory and reinforcement learning provide mathematical and computational approaches for modelling adaptive attacker-defender interactions.This paper proposes CHARLES (Continuous Homeostatic Adversarial Resilience through Learning and Epistemic Sifting), a conceptual defensive architecture designed to continuously manage the information and environmental conditions available to an autonomous attacker.Rather than attempting only to detect an attack after malicious activity has occurred, CHARLES proposes a feedback-based approach consisting of epistemic sifting, adaptive state transformation, adversarial learning estimation, and adversarial utility management.The framework aims to investigate whether controlled environmental variability and strategically deployed deception can reduce the stability of an attacker's learned policy, increase uncertainty, and alter the expected utility of attack strategies.The paper develops a simple mathematical model for representing attacker utility, environmental uncertainty, and defensive transformation.A simulation-based methodology is proposed to compare static and adaptive defensive environments against learning-based attackers.The work does not claim that continuous transformation universally defeats autonomous attackers; instead, it establishes a testable framework for investigating the relationship between defensive environmental adaptation and autonomous attacker learning.

Read PDF

Similar papers

#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54
#machine learning Review Open access Jun 2014

Why Early-Stage Software Startups Fail: A Behavioral Framework

This state-of-practice investigation was performed using a literature review followed by a multiple-case study approach and presents how inconsistency between managerial strategies and execution can lead to failure by means of a behavioral framework.

Carmine Giardino, Xiaofeng Wang, P. Abrahamsson · 175 citations · ⚡19
#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2016

“Failures” to be celebrated: an analysis of major pivots of software startups

This study conducts a case survey study based on the secondary data of the major pivots happened in 49 software startups, and demonstrates that customer need pivot is the most common among all pivot types.

Sohaib Shahid Bajwa, Xiaofeng Wang, Anh Nguyen-Duc et al. · 127 citations · ⚡15
#machine learning Review Open access May 2016

Key Challenges in Software Startups Across Life Cycle Stages

It is found that what perceived as biggest challenges by software startups do vary across different life cycle stages, even though its significance decreases when the learning focuses of the startups move from problem to solution and their products mature.

Xiaofeng Wang, Henry Edison, Sohaib Shahid Bajwa et al. · 62 citations · ⚡6

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Oct 23, 2026

Q&A: How AI came to model the “messy” human mind

Assistant Professor Benjamin Lindquist studies how engineers deliberately injected randomness into early AI, giving rise to deep-learning models that sometimes hallucinate.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.