# kaal:claim:5245185-012

**Claim.** The current monitoring framework is reactive rather than proactive, because it offers no prescriptive measures such as predictive analytics or cross actor protocols that would anticipate evolving risks.

**Type.** failure  **Support.** argued

**Holds when.**

- existing monitoring of AI agents on cryptocurrency rails

**Source quote.**

> offers no prescriptive measures—such as predictive analytics or cross-actor protocols—to anticipate evolving risks, rendering it reactive rather than proactive.

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, *How can we Best Monitor AI Agents* (2025), 6.1. Gaps in Current Monitoring Viability, page 11

**Cite as.** Wulf A. Kaal, How can we Best Monitor AI Agents (2025). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=5245185

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `4d7adba83ec722480e97bde6528cbe9ce98c709e45cb18794f157a64b8fe7da2` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20-%202025%20-%20How%20can%20we%20Best%20Monitor%20AI%20Agents.pdf

**Failure mode.** reactive-not-proactive  (family: ai-oversight-and-alignment-gap)

**Topics.** compliance

**Keywords.** reactive-oversight, predictive-analytics, cross-actor-protocols, monitoring-framework

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.