CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Apr 08, 2026

From Governance Norms to Enforceable Controls: A Layered Translation Method for Runtime Guardrails in Agentic AI

arXiv AI Archived Apr 08, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2604.05229v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic AI systems plan, use tools, maintain state, and produce multi-step trajectories with external effects. Those properties create a governance problem that differs materially from single-turn generative AI: important risks emerge dur- ing execution, not only at model development or deployment time. Governance standards such as ISO/IEC 42001, ISO/IEC 23894, ISO/IEC 42005, ISO/IEC 5338, ISO/IEC 38507, and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework ar

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence [Submitted on 6 Apr 2026] From Governance Norms to Enforceable Controls: A Layered Translation Method for Runtime Guardrails in Agentic AI Christopher Koch Agentic AI systems plan, use tools, maintain state, and produce multi-step trajectories with external effects. Those properties create a governance problem that differs materially from single-turn generative AI: important risks emerge dur- ing execution, not only at model development or deployment time. Governance standards such as ISO/IEC 42001, ISO/IEC 23894, ISO/IEC 42005, ISO/IEC 5338, ISO/IEC 38507, and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework are therefore highly relevant to agentic AI, but they do not by themselves yield implementable runtime guardrails. This paper proposes a layered translation method that connects standards-derived governance objectives to four control layers: governance objectives, design- time constraints, runtime mediation, and assurance feedback. It distinguishes governance objectives, technical controls, runtime guardrails, and assurance evidence; introduces a control tuple and runtime-enforceability rubric for layer assignment; and demonstrates the method in a procurement-agent case study. The central claim is modest: standards should guide control placement across architecture, runtime policy, human escalation, and audit, while runtime guardrails are reserved for controls that are observable, determinate, and time-sensitive enough to justify execution-time intervention. Comments: 5 pages, 2 tables Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC); Machine Learning (cs.LG); Multiagent Systems (cs.MA) Cite as: arXiv:2604.05229 [cs.AI]   (or arXiv:2604.05229v1 [cs.AI] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.05229 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Christopher Koch [view email] [v1] Mon, 6 Apr 2026 22:49:28 UTC (11 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.AI < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-04 Change to browse by: cs cs.HC cs.LG cs.MA References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv AI
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    Apr 08, 2026
    Archived
    Apr 08, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗