arXiv:2610.35978v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Task success is insufficient for testing agents that act for principals, change persistent business state, and affect physical processes: a useful result may be unauthorized, leave obligations unresolved, or depend on the execution substrate. We propose an Agentic Living Lab methodology organized around three questions: what is the test unit, who and what participate, and under what reality is the test executed? The unit is a service episode containing delegated roles, obligations, world state, and evidence. The method separates agents under test from environment actors and distinguishes real humans, human traces, rule surrogates, and agent-based proxies. Realization Profiles, capability-declared Reality Substrate bindings, Grounding Profiles, and Semantic Delta disclosures make changes across software, enterprise systems, simulation, and physical settings explicit. A four-plane reference architecture separates experiment control, participants, world realization, and evidence evaluation, with cross-cutting authority and governance controls. Runtime semantics distinguish intent, normative admission, and factual reconciliation. Real stakeholder grounding, participant calibration or validation, and governed feedback are required for the Living Lab claim, but not synchronous human participation in every run. Released JSON Schemas, deterministic fixtures, and a limited reference runner make selected rules machine-checkable; they are not a complete platform or empirical validation. Constructed travel and industrial designs illustrate authorization and fulfillment failures, proxy sensitivity, and substrate changes. Agent quality, proxy validity, and cross-substrate effect stability remain empirical questions.
Continue to arXiv Software Engineering →You are being forwarded in 6s — stay on this page