Operational-Premise-Taxonomy/paper/pieces/app-opt-agent-example.tex

103 lines
3.1 KiB
TeX
Executable File
Raw Permalink Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

\section{Conceptual Example: OPT in an Agentic Development Workflow}
\label{sec:opt-agent-example}
To illustrate the practical role of OPT in agentic AI systems, we consider a
particular scenario: an autonomous development agent tasked with constructing
and maintaining a production scheduling system under dynamic constraints.
\subsection{Step 1: Goal Intake and OPT--Intent Declaration}
The agent receives the following high-level goal:
\begin{quote}
Design a system to optimize production schedules under variable supply,
equipment downtime, and priority constraints.
\end{quote}
The agent proposes the following OPT--Intent:
\begin{quote}\ttfamily
INTENT-OPT = Sch/Sym \\
INTENT-GOAL = minimize-production-delay \\
INTENT-CONSTRAINTS = deterministic, explainable, real-time \\
INTENT-RISKS = combinatorial-explosion
\end{quote}
The agent explicitly selects search (\Sch) for combinatorial optimization and
symbolic reasoning (\Sym) for constraint enforcement, while avoiding learning
mechanisms to preserve determinism and explainability.
\subsection{Step 2: Implementation and OPT--Code Observation}
During implementation, the agent integrates:
\begin{itemize}
\item A heuristic search planner,
\item A rule-based constraint validator,
\item A neural network model for predicting machine failure.
\end{itemize}
The resulting OPT--Code is:
\begin{quote}\ttfamily
OPT = Sch/Sym/Lrn; \\
Rep = permutations + rules + predictive-model; \\
Time = iterative + online-adjust
\end{quote}
\subsection{Step 3: Drift Detection}
Comparison with OPT--Intent reveals mechanism drift:
\begin{itemize}
\item \Lrn was introduced,
\item Determinism constraint may no longer hold,
\item Risk profile has changed.
\end{itemize}
The agent flags this deviation and evaluates whether predictive learning
violates declared governance constraints.
\subsection{Step 4: Mechanism-Guided Error}
Suppose the system exhibits unstable schedules under rare supply patterns.
Given the OPT--Code, the agent attributes the issue primarily to the
learning-based failure predictor (\Lrn), potentially due to distributional
shift.
\subsection{Step 5: Constraint-Preserving Repair}
The agent proposes two alternatives:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Replace the neural predictor with symbolic failure rules (\Sym),
\item Retain \Lrn but update OPT--Intent and governance constraints.
\end{enumerate}
The first option preserves the original intent. The second requires explicit
authorization.
\subsection{Step 6: Verified Repair}
If the symbolic replacement is adopted, the new OPT--Code becomes:
\begin{quote}\ttfamily
OPT = Sch/Sym
\end{quote}
Alignment with OPT--Intent is restored, and mechanism drift is resolved.
\subsection{Discussion}
This example illustrates how OPT provides:
\begin{itemize}
\item Mechanism-aware planning,
\item Explicit drift detection,
\item Targeted error diagnosis,
\item Governance-compatible repair,
\item Structured traceability.
\end{itemize}
Importantly, OPT does not constrain the agents architecture. Instead, it
provides a stable abstraction layer that connects design commitments,
implementation choices, and remediation strategies.