PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 13, 20260 citationsOpen Access

Regulation In, Regulation Out: An Agentic LLM Architecture for AML

View Full Paper
PNPhume Ngam

Key Points

  • The research aims to enhance traceability and efficiency in anti-money laundering feature engineering.
  • Developed an agentic LLM architecture with a Perceive–Reason–Act loop
  • Created a Regulatory Feature Specification (RFS) for structured translation
  • Implemented and tested the system on two AML datasets
  • Achieved 67.9–75.0% compilation success across models
  • Regulation-grounded features showed Precision@50 ranging from 0.26 to 0.30
  • Maintained structural traceability from regulatory text to feature logic

Abstract

Traditional Anti-Money Laundering (AML) featureengineering manually translates regulatory guidance into detection logic, creating traceability gaps between compliance intentand operational systems. We introduce an agentic LLM architecture where specialized agents autonomously compile regulatorytext into executable detection features via a Perceive–ReasonAct loop with self-correction. The key artifact is the Regulatory Feature Specification (RFS), a structured intermediaterepresentation maintaining structural traceability from regulatory passages to deterministic feature logic. The architectureis schema-adaptive: the same regulatory text from FFIEC andFINTRAC sources compiles to different feature implementationson incompatible database schemas. Experiments on two AMLdatasets demonstrate 67.9–75.0% per-model compilation success(14 indicators × 2 schemas per model), with regulation-groundedfeatures achieving Precision@50 of 0.26 (95% CI: 0.146, 0.403)to 0.30 (95% CI: 0.179, 0.446) on IBM AML versus 0.00 forraw statistical features—while maintaining structural traceability(not semantic correctness) from regulatory passage to flaggedaccount. We use “compilation” throughout as a design metaphorfor structured, artifact-producing translation; the system doesnot provide formal semantic preservation guarantees. The architecture enables AML teams to answer: “Why did you build thisfeature?”

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Phume Ngam (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/698ebf6985a1ff6a93016f25https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18604873
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper