Incident Twins: What Logs Can Establish After an Agent Stops
Rohith Yanambaka Venkata
After an agent stops, what can its logs establish about accepted work? Incident Twins checks whether retained evidence rules out in-scope commitments during a fixed post-stop interval. Study 1 uses scripted responses in Pydantic AI. Three asynchronous pairs have byte-identical configured native/controller records but opposite outcomes. Terminal receipts and a separate pending-work check distinguish outcome evidence from collection coverage. Study 2 tests whether effects can commit without audit records. In 30 process-interruption runs, separate transactions leave such gaps. A joint effect/audit transaction with a complete scoped snapshot resolves all 15 comparator runs. A simple query matches all 30 measured runs, but concludes on a contradictory control that the richer checker rejects. Study 2’s raw records differ: its opposing examples match only on declared selected fields. Neither study establishes permanent containment or permission to resume. I list what an operator should retain. The resulting verdict depends on explicit scope and trust.
No reviews are available yet
Cite this work
@misc {
title={
(HckPrj) Incident Twins: What Logs Can Establish After an Agent Stops
},
author={
Rohith Yanambaka Venkata
},
date={
},
organization={Apart Research},
note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},
howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}
}


