惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

I
InfoQ
博客园 - 司徒正美
爱范儿
爱范儿
F
Fortinet All Blogs
J
Java Code Geeks
量子位
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
腾讯CDC
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
Microsoft Security Blog
Microsoft Security Blog
T
The Blog of Author Tim Ferriss
V
V2EX
L
LangChain Blog
aimingoo的专栏
aimingoo的专栏
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
云风的 BLOG
云风的 BLOG
T
Tailwind CSS Blog
Blog — PlanetScale
Blog — PlanetScale
GbyAI
GbyAI
A
About on SuperTechFans
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
Y
Y Combinator Blog

cs.AI updates on arXiv.org

Policy Split: Incentivizing Dual-Mode Exploration in LLM Reinforcement with Dual-Mode Entropy Regularization METER: Evaluating Multi-Level Contextual Causal Reasoning in Large Language Models Think Before you Write: QA-Guided Reasoning for Character Descriptions in Books METRO: Towards Strategy Induction from Expert Dialogue Transcripts for Non-collaborative Dialogues Retrieval as Generation: A Unified Framework with Self-Triggered Information Planning Do LLMs Know Tool Irrelevance? Demystifying Structural Alignment Bias in Tool Invocations Enhancing Multimodal Large Language Models for Ancient Chinese Character Evolution Analysis via Glyph-Driven Fine-Tuning Exploring Knowledge Conflicts for Faithful LLM Reasoning: Benchmark and Method CocoaBench: Evaluating Unified Digital Agents in the Wild MathAgent: Adversarial Evolution of Constraint Graphs for Mathematical Reasoning Data Synthesis Efficient Training for Cross-lingual Speech Language Models Shared Emotion Geometry Across Small Language Models: A Cross-Architecture Study of Representation, Behavior, and Methodological Confounds A Systematic Analysis of the Impact of Persona Steering on LLM Capabilities Uncertainty-Aware Web-Conditioned Scientific Fact-Checking When Valid Signals Fail: Regime Boundaries Between LLM Features and RL Trading Policies When Verification Fails: How Compositionally Infeasible Claims Escape Rejection Mem$^2$Evolve: Towards Self-Evolving Agents via Co-Evolutionary Capability Expansion and Experience Distillation AOP-Smart: A RAG-Enhanced Large Language Model Framework for Adverse Outcome Pathway Analysis Advancing Polish Language Modeling through Tokenizer Optimization in the Bielik v3 7B and 11B Series TInR: Exploring Tool-Internalized Reasoning in Large Language Models Do BERT Embeddings Encode Narrative Dimensions? A Token-Level Probing Analysis of Time, Space, Causality, and Character in Fiction Generating Multiple-Choice Knowledge Questions with Interpretable Difficulty Estimation using Knowledge Graphs and Large Language Models Deep-Reporter: Deep Research for Grounded Multimodal Long-Form Generation Too Nice to Tell the Truth: Quantifying Agreeableness-Driven Sycophancy in Role-Playing Language Models Learning and Enforcing Context-Sensitive Control for LLMs Efficient Process Reward Modeling via Contrastive Mutual Information Computational Lesions in Multilingual Language Models Separate Shared and Language-specific Brain Alignment Bridging Linguistic Gaps: Cross-Lingual Mapping in Pre-Training and Dataset for Enhanced Multilingual LLM Performance Early Decisions Matter: Proximity Bias and Initial Trajectory Shaping in Non-Autoregressive Diffusion Language Models LLMs Should Incorporate Explicit Mechanisms for Human Empathy
How to Count AIs: Individuation and Liability for AI Agents
Yonathan Arbel, Peter Salib, Simon Goldstein · 2026-02-25 · via cs.AI updates on arXiv.org

Very soon, millions of AI agents will proliferate across the economy, autonomously taking billions of actions. Inevitably, things will go wrong. Humans will be defrauded, injured, even killed. Law will somehow have to govern the coming wave. But when an AI causes harm, the first question to answer, before anyone can be held accountable is: Which AI Did It? Identifying AIs is unusually difficult. AIs lack bodies. They can copy, split, merge, swarm, and vanish at will. Even today, a "single" AI agent is often an ensemble of instances based on multiple models. The complexity will only multiply as AI capabilities improve. This Article is the first to comprehensively diagnose the legal problem of identifying AIs. Two kinds of identity are required: "thin" and "thick." Thin identification ties every AI action to some human principal, essential for holding accountable the humans who make and use AI agents. Thick identification distinguishes between AI agents, qua agents -- sorting millions of AI entities into discrete, persistent units with stable, coherent goals, essential where principal-agent problems prevent humans from perfectly controlling AIs. This Article also presents a solution: the "Algorithmic Corporation" or "A-corp" -- a legal-fictional entity that can hold property, make contracts, and litigate in its own name. Owned by humans but run by AIs, A-corps solve the thin identity problem by tying AI actions to a human owner, and the thick identity problem via emergent self-organization. A-corps own the resources -- including compute -- that AIs need to accomplish their goals, giving AI managers strong incentives to share control only with goal-aligned AIs. In equilibrium, incentive and selection mechanisms force A-corps to self-organize into persistent, legally legible entities with coherent goals that respond rationally to legal incentives, like liability.