Jiahong Liu

Jinhu Qi, Muzhi Li, Jiahong Liu et al.

Agentic AI systems -- Large Language Models (LLMs) augmented with planning, tool use, memory, and long-horizon interactions -- can execute complex tasks autonomously, but their multi-step trajectories introduce new failure modes that challenge trustworthiness. This survey provides a focused examination of trustworthy agentic AI through two core dimensions that are critical for high-risk deployments: Safety and Robustness, and Privacy and System Security. For each dimension, we clarify key concepts, identify where risks emerge along the agent workflow, and summarize stage-targeted mitigation strategies. Other trustworthiness aspects (value alignment, transparency, fairness, and accountability) are discussed as relevant context rather than parallel chapters. To support consistent comparison and deployment decisions, we consolidate evaluation into a unified metrics-and-benchmarks hub, emphasizing both outcome and process signals (e.g., constraint violations, trace completeness, and adversarial success rates) and offering scenario-to-metric guidance for release gating. We conclude by outlining open challenges such as self-evolving agents, runtime monitoring and verification, privacy-preserving personalization, and the trust-utility trade-off, and present a case study of real-world security failures in open-source agentic systems. Our goal is to serve as a practical reference for researchers and practitioners building trustworthy agentic systems in high-stakes environments.

Yanyu Chen, Jiyue Jiang, Jiahong Liu et al.

The evaluation of Deep Research Agents is a critical challenge, as conventional outcome-based metrics fail to capture the nuances of their complex reasoning. Current evaluation faces two primary challenges: 1) a reliance on singular metrics like Pass@1, creating a "high-score illusion" that ignores the quality, efficiency, and soundness of the reasoning process; and 2) the failure of static benchmarks to quantify crucial attributes like robustness and latent capability. To address these gaps, we introduce TRACE (Trajectory-Aware Comprehensive Evaluation), a framework that holistically assesses the entire problem-solving trajectory. To counter the "high-score illusion", we propose a Hierarchical Trajectory Utility Function that quantifies process efficiency and cognitive quality, including evidence grounding, alongside accuracy. To measure deeper attributes, TRACE introduces a Scaffolded Capability Assessment protocol, quantifying an agent's latent ability by determining the minimum guidance needed for success. Our contributions include the TRACE framework, its novel metrics, and the accompanying DeepResearch-Bench with controllable complexity. Experiments show TRACE delivers a granular ranking that uncovers critical trade-offs between agent accuracy, efficiency, and robustness entirely missed by singular metrics.

Wenhao Yu, Shaohang Wei, Jiahong Liu et al.

Token-level reweighting is a simple yet effective mechanism for controlling supervised fine-tuning, but common indicators are largely one-dimensional: the ground-truth probability reflects downstream alignment, while token entropy reflects intrinsic uncertainty induced by the pre-training prior. Ignoring entropy can misidentify noisy or easily replaceable tokens as learning-critical, while ignoring probability fails to reflect target-specific alignment. RankTuner introduces a probability--entropy calibration signal, the Relative Rank Indicator, which compares the rank of the ground-truth token with its expected rank under the prediction distribution. The inverse indicator is used as a token-wise Relative Scale to reweight the fine-tuning objective, focusing updates on truly under-learned tokens without over-penalizing intrinsically uncertain positions. Experiments on multiple backbones show consistent improvements on mathematical reasoning benchmarks, transfer gains on out-of-distribution reasoning, and pre code generation performance over probability-only or entropy-only reweighting baselines.