aiqbench analysis
This paper introduces Agentic4PDM, a framework that integrates Large Language Model agents with a deterministic host controller to manage evidence admissibility in industrial fault diagnosis. By enforcing contract-checked gated adjudication, the system separates adaptive investigation from control over tool usage, effectively addressing ambiguity without requiring costly retraining for changing operating conditions. The approach demonstrates improved diagnostic accuracy on bearing and motor datasets by rigorously distinguishing between corroborative support and advisory information.
Agentic4PDM: Host-Governed Evidence Admissibility for Industrial Fault Diagnosis
arXiv:2610.17786v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We study industrial fault diagnosis as a classification task that assigns sensor time-series windows to predefined health states or fault types. Scarce labels and changing operating conditions make repeated training of specialized classifiers costly. Yet structures such as periodicity, trends, and transients can remain diagnostically informative and be examined through reusable analytical tools. LLM agents can select and interpret these tools, but fixed rules or training-derived guidance may not resolve each signal's ambiguity, while unconstrained interpretation may overstate weak or conflicting results. We introduce Agentic4PDM, a framework that separates adaptive investigation from control over evidence use. LLM agents compare each signal with labeled references from every candidate class, identify unresolved distinctions, and propose follow-up measurements. A deterministic software controller, called the host, enforces contract-checked gated adjudication (CCGA): it checks requests, requires commitment to a complete tool batch before results are observed, and assigns evidence roles based on tool checks against labeled references. These roles distinguish corroborative support from advisory information. The Judge Agent proposes a diagnosis, while the controller checks protocol compliance and records the investigation. Agentic4PDM supports training-free diagnosis using pretrained representations and labeled references without task-specific diagnostic models, and a standard setting that additionally investigates trained-model predictions. Experiments on selected bearing and motor diagnosis challenges and an unfiltered industrial test set supplied by our customer show gains in aggregate macro F1 over the evaluated diagnostic and agentic baselines. Ablations further support the value of the governed workflow.
Abstract:We study industrial fault diagnosis as a classification task that assigns sensor time-series windows to predefined health states or fault types. Scarce labels and changing operating conditions make repeated training of specialized classifiers costly. Yet structures such as periodicity, trends, and transients can remain diagnostically informative and be examined through reusable analytical tools. LLM agents can select and interpret these tools, but fixed rules or training-derived guidance may not resolve each signal's ambiguity, while unconstrained interpretation may overstate weak or conflicting results. We introduce Agentic4PDM, a framework that separates adaptive investigation from control over evidence use. LLM agents compare each signal with labeled references from every candidate class, identify unresolved distinctions, and propose follow-up measurements. A deterministic software controller, called the host, enforces contract-checked gated adjudication (CCGA): it checks requests, requires commitment to a complete tool batch before results are observed, and assigns evidence roles based on tool checks against labeled references. These roles distinguish corroborative support from advisory information. The Judge Agent proposes a diagnosis, while the controller checks protocol compliance and records the investigation. Agentic4PDM supports training-free diagnosis using pretrained representations and labeled references without task-specific diagnostic models, and a standard setting that additionally investigates trained-model predictions. Experiments on selected bearing and motor diagnosis challenges and an unfiltered industrial test set supplied by our customer show gains in aggregate macro F1 over the evaluated diagnostic and agentic baselines. Ablations further support the value of the governed workflow.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2610.17786 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2610.17786v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.17786 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 336 words
Related coverage

Underwriting Superintelligence: Backing Agents you can Sue — Rune Kvist, AIUC
Latent Space · Sep 16, 2026

LiveLaw Supreme Court Half-Yearly Digest: January - June 2026 [Part 2]
livelaw.in · Sep 13, 2026
Links #3: 2026/06 Part 1
LessWrong · Jun 15, 2026

Article: Governing AI in the Cloud: A Practical Guide for Architects
InfoQ · Jun 15, 2026