Skip to main content
1 min readExecutive Guide

Executive Guide

Research Summary: Testing and Evaluation of Agentic AI Systems In Military Command and Control

Original authors
Attribution requires verification
Original source
arXiv — Computers and Society
Summary & Analysis prepared by
Aziz Shuaib Ausi
Resource type
Research Summary / Knowledge Resource
Resource published on AZIZ OS
28 August 2026
Last updated
8 October 2026
Reading time
1 min
Publication type
Executive Guide
Availability
Open access
About this Summary & Analysis

AZIZ OS provides independently prepared summaries and analytical interpretations of externally published research and knowledge sources. The underlying works remain attributable to their original authors and rights holders. This resource is intended to improve accessibility and understanding and does not replace the original publication.

Checking access…

Research identifies significant challenges in the testing and evaluation (T&E) of agentic AI systems for military command and control (C2). Current T&E methodologies, which rely on assumptions about system specifiability, stability, composability, and supervisability, are undermined by the inherent properties of agentic AI. This weakness in the assurance case for these systems raises concerns about the feasibility of fulfilling public commitments to rigorous testing and human oversight.

Why it matters

The adoption of agentic AI in critical domains like military command and control is a significant technological and operational shift. Challenges in effectively testing and evaluating these systems could lead to unforeseen risks, operational failures, and undermine public trust in AI-driven decision-making, impacting national security and strategic stability.

Key insights

  • Agentic AI systems are being acquired for military C2, with public commitments to rigorous testing and human oversight.
  • The ability to meet these commitments depends on a robust assurance case, comprising claims, evidence, and argument.
  • A review of 240 documented T&E practices identified eight critical assumptions made by established methods regarding their test article.
  • These assumptions fall into four clusters: system specifiability, stability, composability, and supervisability.
  • The inherent properties of agentic AI systems weaken all eight identified assumptions, complicating their rigorous testing.
  • The integrity of the assurance case for agentic AI in C2 is compromised by these weakened assumptions.

Source

arXiv — Computers and Society — https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.20597

Citation

Cite the original work (APA 7)

The original source is authoritative for this citation. Cite the source publication directly — this attribution is pending verification. Open the original source.

Verification

This is an authenticated AZIZ OS resource record.

Verification ID
ASA-EXG-2026-00652
Version
v1.0 · r0
Issued
28 August 2026
Resource prepared by
Aziz Shuaib Ausi
Resource status
Research Summary / Knowledge Resource
Underlying work
Testing and Evaluation of Agentic AI Systems In Military Command and Control
Original authors
Attribution requires verification
Original source
arXiv — Computers and Society
Provenance status
Attribution requires verification
Rights
Underlying publication rights remain with the respective copyright holder(s). Refer to the original source for authoritative publication and licensing information.

This verification confirms the AZIZ OS resource record and its documented provenance. It does not establish authorship of the underlying external work.

Verify this resource