aiqbench analysis
This research investigates how different noise sources—external, internal, or control-generated—affect the stability and regulatory burden of adaptive agents in simulation. The study reveals that persistent internal disturbances create the highest exposure, while imposing costs on corrective updates leads to a nonmonotonic response where system variability initially increases before corrective activity is eventually suppressed. These findings are critical for designing robust AI controllers that can distinguish between inherent stochasticity and artifacts introduced by their own regulation mechanisms.
The Source of Disturbance Matters: External, Internal, and Control-Generated Noise in Adaptive Regulation
arXiv:2609.26428v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Adaptive regulation can itself perturb the state it is intended to stabilize. In replicated simulations of an adaptive agent, we compare external disturbance, persistent internally generated disturbance, and control-generated disturbance under regulation-first and disturbance-first ordering. Persistent internal disturbance produces the largest exposure and regulatory burden within the tested parameter grid. When positive controller updates generate an immediate disturbance cost, increasing that cost produces a nonmonotonic response: effective disturbance initially rises, variability across stochastic runs increases over an intermediate range, and corrective activity becomes strongly suppressed at higher costs. The results show how disturbance source and timing shape exposure and controller burden in this model. They motivate testing adaptive agents with distinct disturbance sources and assessing regulatory activity alongside exposure.
Abstract:Adaptive regulation can itself perturb the state it is intended to stabilize. In replicated simulations of an adaptive agent, we compare external disturbance, persistent internally generated disturbance, and control-generated disturbance under regulation-first and disturbance-first ordering. Persistent internal disturbance produces the largest exposure and regulatory burden within the tested parameter grid. When positive controller updates generate an immediate disturbance cost, increasing that cost produces a nonmonotonic response: effective disturbance initially rises, variability across stochastic runs increases over an intermediate range, and corrective activity becomes strongly suppressed at higher costs. The results show how disturbance source and timing shape exposure and controller burden in this model. They motivate testing adaptive agents with distinct disturbance sources and assessing regulatory activity alongside exposure.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Systems and Control (eess.SY); Adaptation and Self-Organizing Systems (nlin.AO)
arXiv:2609.26428 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.26428v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.26428 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 · 222 words
Related coverage

Chris Ballance, The British Quantum Entrepreneur Who Put Ion Traps On A Chip
Quantum Zeitgeist · Aug 5, 2026

Game-Theoretic Disempowerment: Loss of Control to Agencyless AI
LessWrong · Sep 27, 2026
IBM claims their quantum computers outperform classical ones
cen.acs.org · Aug 4, 2026

AI and Quantum Computing Briefing
livetradingnews.com · Aug 4, 2026