Learn how Endava is using AI agents, ChatGPT Enterprise, and Codex to accelerate software delivery, automate workflows, and build an AI-native culture across the enterprise.

ChatGPT introduces a new memory system to better remember preferences, keeping context fresh and relevant across conversations.

arXiv:2606.04037v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Pre-deployment verification of enterprise artificial intelligence (AI) agents remains a critical gap between large language model (LLM) capability benchmarking and production deployment. Post-deployment monitoring, human-in-the-loop controls, and prompt-level guardrails offer limited assurance once an agent is operating in production. We propose an ontology-grounded verification framework combining three components: an Agent Operational Envelope formalizing the certification space across permissions, domain constraints, safety properties, governance rules, and autonomy levels; an ontology-to-scenario generation pipeline that derives regulatory, operational, and adversarial test scenarios automatically; and a Trust Certificate carrying a machine-verifiable attestation with graduated deployment verdicts (Approved, Conditional, Rejected). A controlled pilot across four regulated industries (Fintech, Banking, Insurance, and Healthcare), instantiated as five industry-by-regulatory-regime cells across the United States and Vietnam, generated 1,800 scenarios evaluated against 125 primary-source regulatory requirements and 25 injected faults. Ontology-grounded generation (G4) achieved 48.3% regulatory coverage versus 33.1% for the persona-based baseline (corrected p = .0006) and the highest domain specificity (4.77/5.0; p = 2e-6). The coverage advantage over baseline and retrieval-augmented prompting was not robust after Bonferroni correction. Cross-validation across three LLM families (Claude Sonnet 4, Qwen 2.5 72B, Gemma 4 26B; 5,400 total scenarios) replicated the persona-versus-ontology pattern. The results establish ontology-grounded scenario generation as a credible complement to persona-based test suites for regulatory-intensive domains.

arXiv:2606.04150v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Public discourse and emerging policy typically assume that AI emotional support is a deliberate act: a lonely user consciously seeking comfort from a dedicated companion chatbot. In this paper, we draw on emerging empirical evidence and argue that this picture is inaccurate on two accounts, both in how AI emotional support arises and how it shapes future behavior. First, AI emotional support commonly emerges incidentally within task-oriented interactions on general-purpose platforms, much as workplace friendships deepen through collaboration. Second, these incidental encounters are path-dependent: positive experiences of AI emotional support update people’s beliefs about AI’s emotional capabilities and redirect their choices for future emotional support, increasing preference for AI and decreasing preference for humans. We review recent evidence, including a large-scale longitudinal study conducted in collaboration with OpenAI, showing that daily five-minute conversations with an AI about personal issues over 28 days led to a 10.3% decrease in the preference for seeking support from humans and an 11.6% increase in the preference for AI. These findings suggest that current policy, focused on companion apps and isolated interactions, cannot adequately protect human connection. Instead, effective regulations should extend to general-purpose AI systems and address cumulative, trajectory-level changes in how people seek support. Recognizing how people stumble into AI emotional support and how those encounters redirect human connections over time is essential to safeguarding human well-being.