PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 6, 2026AI0 citationsOpen Access

Agentic AI Safety: A Structured Review of Open Problems and Their Regulatory Anchoring

View Full Paper
TVTomas ValentaOROndřej RozinekJHJosef Horálek

Key Points

  • This review aims to categorize open scientific problems in the safety of autonomous AI agents and their alignment with regulatory frameworks.
  • Conducted a structured PRISMA-ScR review by analyzing sources from arXiv, machine-learning conferences, and security venues.
  • Mapped identified problems onto the EU AI Act and NIST AI Risk Management Framework.
  • Distinguished between open scientific challenges and deployment risks, focusing on eight problem families.
  • Identified eight key problem families in agentic AI safety, such as goal specification and interpretability.
  • Highlighted alignment between certain problem families and regulatory frameworks, noting significant gaps, particularly in multi-agent safety.
  • Developed a research roadmap and a triage for deployment postures to guide practitioners.

Abstract

The shift from passive predictive models to autonomous agents capable of tool use and multi-step planning moves the AI safety landscape from prediction error to control failure: small misjudgements become irreversible actions, and risks compound across long horizons and populations of interacting systems. We present a structured review and taxonomy of open scientific problems in agentic AI safety, mapped explicitly onto the EU AI Act and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework. The corpus follows a PRISMA-ScR scoping review, assembled through anchor-based citation chaining and curated reading lists across arXiv, the major machine-learning conferences, and selected security and fairness venues, with a primary March 2026 search cut-off (extended to May 2026 during revision for a small number of high-relevance governance and agentic-safety sources), explicit eligibility criteria, and an analytical distinction between open scientific problems and deployment risks. The taxonomy identifies eight problem families spanning reinforcement-learning policies and language-model planners: goal specification, inner alignment, safe learning and robustness, scalable oversight, interpretability, tool-use security, multi-agent safety, and evaluation and assurance. Mapping these onto the two frameworks shows close alignment for some families and notable absences for others, with multi-agent safety surfacing as a regulatory gap. We add a per-family research roadmap with concrete milestones and a practitioner-facing deployment-posture triage, arguing that progress on inner alignment, interpretability for deceptive-alignment detection, and multi-agent safety would most directly reduce compliance uncertainty.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Valenta et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a7437ba764cddc9499d555ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/ai7080298
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper