arXiv:2604.23280cs.AIcs.CR2026-04被引 4

为无实体的AI代理建立可验证的身份体系,解决其责任归属难题

AI Identity: Standards, Gaps, and Research Directions for AI Agents

  • 构建四维对比框架,揭示人类身份与AI身份的根本差异
  • 发现现有技术与法规无法有效管控跨边界、非确定性的自主代理
  • 提出五大结构性缺口,强调需基础研究而非单纯工程优化

AI代理现在正无需人工持续监督,在组织边界外执行真实交易、工作流和子代理链。这带来了一个当前基础设施无法解决的问题:如何识别、验证并追究一个无身体、无持久记忆、无法律地位的实体的责任?我们定义了AI身份为代理声明身份与其行为表现之间的连续关系,且两者在任意时刻对应关系的置信度受限。通过结构化调研行业趋势、新兴标准和技术文献,我们对代理身份全生命周期进行了差距分析,并作出三项贡献:(1) 在四个维度(载体、持久性、可验证性、法律地位)上对人类与AI身份进行结构性比较,表明这种不对称是根本性的,若不进行结构修改就将人类框架扩展至代理,将导致系统性失败;(2) 评估现有技术和监管文件对自主代理身份需求的适配性,发现均未能有效应对非确定性、跨边界实体的治理挑战;(3) 识别出五个关键缺口(语义意图验证、递归委托责任、代理身份完整性、治理透明度与执行、运营可持续性),这些缺口为结构性问题,仅靠更多工程投入无法填补。本报告的核心结论是:必须开展关于AI身份的基础研究。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

AI agents are now running real transactions, workflows, and sub-agent chains across organizational boundaries without continuous human supervision. This creates a problem no current infrastructure is equipped to solve: how do you identify, verify, and hold accountable an entity with no body, no persistent memory, and no legal standing? We define AI Identity as the continuous relationship between what an AI agent is declared to be and what it is observed to do, bounded by the confidence that those two things correspond at any given moment. Through a structured survey of industry trends, emerging standards, and technical literature, we conduct a gap analysis across the full agent identity lifecycle and make three contributions: (1) a structural comparison of human and AI identity across four dimensions (substrate, persistence, verifiability, and legal standing) showing that the asymmetry is fundamental and that extending human frameworks to agents without structural modification produces systematic failures; (2) an evaluation of current technical and regulatory documents against the identity requirements of autonomous agents, finding that none adequately address the challenge of governing nondeterministic, boundary-crossing entities; and (3) identification of five critical gaps (semantic intent verification, recursive delegation accountability, agent identity integrity, governance opacity and enforcement, and operational sustainability) that no current technology or regulatory instrument resolves. These gaps are structural; more engineering effort alone will not close them. Foundational research on AI identity is the central conclusion of this report.

AI身份代理治理责任追溯基础研究

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。