Grama Chethan

Arquimedes Canedo, Grama Chethan

When an AI agent calls an API and hits a validation error, it needs more than what went wrong -- it needs what to do next. A self-reflective API returns, on validation failure, a machine-readable recovery\_feedback.suggestions[] payload sufficient for the agent to repair the request and retry without external reasoning. On a leak-audited pilot ($N{=}30$ per cell, 3 LLMs, 10 adversarial tasks), structured suggestions lift task-completion rate by $+36.7$--$40.0$pp over plain-English diagnoses on Anthropic models (Fisher's exact $p \le 0.0022$), at $1.8$--$2.2\times$ better per-success token efficiency. The lift is not significant on gpt-4o-mini ($p{=}0.435$); a second-domain replication on a billing API confirms the pattern. The comparison only holds after auditing two undocumented classes of answer leakage in LLM benchmarks. We shipaudit\_prompt\_leakage.py as reusable CI infrastructure. Code and data: https://github.com/arquicanedo/self-reflective-apis.

Grama Chethan

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) fails systematically on queries requiring structural reasoning over interconnected entities. We compare eight retrieval architectures for aerospace supply chain intelligence, progressing from text retrieval through graph traversal to graph computation. Using a 46-node knowledge graph with 64 typed edges, we evaluate 23 queries across 10 intent categories and demonstrate that five query classes are structurally unreachable for vector retrieval. Our central finding is the operator vocabulary thesis: the barrier to LLM-based graph reasoning is not model intelligence but the computational operators available as tools. An LLM Query Planner with 9 typed traversal primitives outperforms bespoke handlers (F1 = 0.632 vs. 0.472) while generalizing to unseen queries. Adding 6 graph computation tools, the LLM selectively adopts them for exactly the query categories where traversal fails. We also identify a measurement gap: entity-level F1 systematically underscores structural queries where comprehensive answers are correct.

Grama Chethan

LLarge language model (LLM)-based AI agents deployed in manufacturing environments require populated, schema-correct data for validation, yet production MES data is proprietary, privacy-encumbered, and vendor-specific. This paper introduces the Template-as-Ontology principle: a single Python configuration module (700-770 lines, 45 validated exports) serves simultaneously as the specification for a time-stepped manufacturing simulator and as the runtime domain schema for AI analytics tools, producing alignment by construction rather than integration. We formally define the domain template as a typed relational configuration schema and prove that structural alignment between simulation and tool layers is guaranteed by single-source consumption. A five-layer pipeline--simulation, PostgreSQL, CDC/Iceberg lakehouse, star schema, and 12 parameterized AI tools--generates causally coherent, MES-shaped data spanning 66 entity types across four operational domains mapped to ISA-95/IEC 62264. We validate the architecture with six industry templates (aerospace, pharma, automotive, electronics, beverages, warehousing) running on identical framework code. Calibration experiments (60 runs, 10 seeds per template) confirm parametric controllability: observed KPIs fall within configured ranges across all templates. A controlled hallucination experiment (72 tool invocations, Qwen3-32B) demonstrates that ontology-constrained parameters eliminate tool-parameter fabrication (0% constrained vs. 43% unconstrained hallucination rate for the evaluated model, Fisher's exact test p < 10^-12); the 0% constrained rate is an architectural guarantee that holds for any model. The framework provides a reusable data layer for discrete manufacturing AI validation.

Grama Chethan

Large language model (LLM)-based AI agents are increasingly deployed in manufacturing environments for analytics, quality management, and decision support. These agents demonstrate statistical fluency with domain terminology but lack grounded understanding of operational semantics -- the relational structure that connects equipment identifiers, process parameters, failure codes, and regulatory constraints within a specific production context. This paper identifies and formalizes the semantic training gap: a structural disconnect between how AI systems acquire domain vocabulary through training and how manufacturing operations define meaning through ontological relationships. We demonstrate that this gap causes operationally incorrect outputs even when model responses are linguistically precise, and that in multi-agent configurations it produces a compounding failure mode we term semantic drift. To close this gap, we present an architecture that embeds manufacturing ontology directly into the AI tool layer as a typed relational configuration, enforcing semantic constraints at runtime rather than relying on model training. The architecture is formalized as a three-operation interface contract -- resolve, contextualize, annotate -- with invariants enforced by an AIOps orchestration layer. In a controlled experiment across six industry configurations (72 tool invocations using Qwen3-32B), unconstrained tool parameters produced a 43% hallucination rate for domain identifiers; ontology-grounded parameters reduced this to 0%. We validate the approach through a digital twin analytics platform demonstrating that a single codebase with domain-specific ontology configurations eliminates tool-call hallucination and achieves cross-domain configurability without application code changes.