CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Jun 10, 2026

Trace2Policy: From Expert Behavior Traces to Self-Evolving Decision Agents

arXiv AI Archived Jun 10, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2606.10457v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Decision rules that enterprise experts apply tacitly -- in auditing, compliance, and contract review -- can be systematically recovered and improved through iterative error analysis. We present \textbf{Trace2Policy}, whose core mechanism -- \textbf{EISR} (\textbf{E}rror-driven \textbf{I}terative \textbf{S}kill \textbf{R}efinement) -- maintains a human-readable rule document as its optimization target: each round executes the rules on a validation s

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence [Submitted on 9 Jun 2026] Trace2Policy: From Expert Behavior Traces to Self-Evolving Decision Agents Junli Zha, Jinbo Wang, Chao Zhou, Xiang Song Decision rules that enterprise experts apply tacitly -- in auditing, compliance, and contract review -- can be systematically recovered and improved through iterative error analysis. We present \textbf{Trace2Policy}, whose core mechanism -- \textbf{EISR} (\textbf{E}rror-driven \textbf{I}terative \textbf{S}kill \textbf{R}efinement) -- maintains a human-readable rule document as its optimization target: each round executes the rules on a validation set, clusters errors by root cause into MISSING, WRONG, or CONFLICT types, applies targeted patches, and commits only those that pass a regression gate. \textbf{For this class of compliance-sensitive, skewed-base-rate decision tasks, we identify rule quality -- not model capability -- as the dominant performance lever}: across five LLMs, one-shot distillation plateaus near \sim70\% on the deployed pool, while eight EISR rounds lift the same rules to 79.6\% when compiled into deterministic Python -- zero LLM calls at inference. \textbf{Execution form compounds the gain: in production, the same EISR-refined content runs 9.8~pp higher as compiled Python than as an LLM prompt, a form-and-engineering bundle the 22-day deployment matured together.} Deployed for 22 days at a major logistics carrier (3,349 audit cases), the compiled pipeline outperforms the pure-LLM baseline it replaced (72.7\%); on these calibrated, skewed-base-rate workloads, re-enabling LLM fallback monotonically degrades accuracy. An LLM-driven variant, \textbf{Auto-EISR}, reproduces this refinement at $5--$10 per cycle versus \sim70 expert-hours, and transfers to four public benchmarks spanning legal reasoning (LegalBench) and process-mining decisions (BPIC 2012) without re-engineering. Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) Cite as: arXiv:2606.10457 [cs.AI]   (or arXiv:2606.10457v1 [cs.AI] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.10457 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Junli Zha [view email] [v1] Tue, 9 Jun 2026 06:05:29 UTC (66 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.AI < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-06 Change to browse by: cs 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
    Jun 10, 2026
    Archived
    Jun 10, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗