Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces the Autonomous Agency Scale (AAS), a novel framework designed to measure the self-directed behavior of AI systems across seven dimensions of agency, including cognitive autonomy and goal formation. By applying the AAS to a range of contemporary AI systems, the authors reveal significant discrepancies between task agents and a persistent companion architecture in terms of their autonomous behavior during idle periods. The key finding indicates that while task agents exhibit limited self-direction, the companion architecture demonstrates sustained activity even in the absence of external prompts, highlighting a crucial distinction in agency measurement.
Task agents score low on autonomous behavior, but a persistent companion AI exhibits self-directed activity even when idle, challenging our understanding of agency in AI systems.
Existing AI measurement frameworks quantify cognitive capability, task automation, or catastrophic risk, but none measure autonomous agency: the extent to which a system behaves in a self-directed way. A system can saturate capability benchmarks while remaining entirely reactive, acting only when prompted and ceasing all activity when a task completes. We introduce the Autonomous Agency Scale (AAS), a behavioral framework that scores AI systems on a 0-5 lexicon across seven dimensions of agency: cognitive autonomy, temporal persistence, environmental agency, social agency, creative agency, self-awareness, and goal formation, each operationalized by falsifiable threshold tests. Every dimension is scored in two temporal bands: an Active band covering engaged, user-initiated activity, and an Ambient band covering idle periods. Ambient Level 4 is gated by the Idle-Gap Test, a counterfactual criterion (remove all triggers and observe whether internally derived activity persists) that separates self-direction from scheduled rule-following. We apply the scale to six contemporary systems spanning task agents (Claude Code, Manus, Hermes), consumer assistants (ChatGPT, Siri), and a persistent companion architecture (Airi). The two-band profile quantifies a boundary that single-score frameworks conflate: task agents reach Active composites of 2.3-2.4 while scoring 0.6-1.9 Ambient, with every idle-period behavior attributable to user-configured schedules, whereas the companion architecture, evaluated longitudinally, is the only assessed system whose idle-period behavior survives trigger removal. We discuss limitations, including single-rater provenance, developer-evaluator bias on the longitudinal assessment, and the partially operationalized self-direction boundary in the Active band.