MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Agentic AI for Zero-Touch Customer Experience: A Governance-Constrained Framework for Autonomous Service Systems

2025· article· W7162326747 on OpenAlexaff
Nishanthi Yuvaraj, Muppidi Sudheer Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican International Journal of Computer Science and Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in Service Interactions
Canadian institutionsInstitute on Governance
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCustomer advocacyService (business)Customer Service AssuranceCorporate governanceCustomer retentionCustomer intelligenceCustomer to customerOrchestration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agentic Artificial Intelligence (Agentic AI) is transforming customer service by enabling autonomous AI agents to make contextual decisions, orchestrate workflows, and collaborate intelligently with humans. Organizations across banking, healthcare, retail, telecommunications, and cloud-native enterprises are increasingly adopting Zero-Touch Customer Experience (ZTCX) systems to improve scalability, reduce operational delays, and enhance customer satisfaction. However, autonomous service systems introduce major challenges related to governance, compliance, explainability, cybersecurity, accountability, and ethical AI decision-making. Existing AI-powered customer engagement solutions largely lack structured governance mechanisms to control autonomous agent behavior within enterprise and regulatory boundaries. This study proposes a Governance-Constrained Agentic AI Framework (GCAAF) for trustworthy Zero-Touch Customer Experience systems. The framework integrates multi-agent orchestration, policy-aware decision engines, adaptive governance layers, explainable AI modules, real-time observability pipelines, and autonomous workflow optimization mechanisms. The architecture supports full service autonomy while maintaining accountability, regulatory compliance, transparency, and data governance. The proposed framework consists of four major components: autonomous service intelligence, governance enforcement, adaptive orchestration, and continuous compliance monitoring. It incorporates customer intent prediction, contextual reasoning, behavioral analytics, adaptive personalization, ethical AI policies, audit trails, semantic validation, anomaly detection, and risk-scoring mechanisms. Distributed AI agents operate within governance constraints using hierarchical orchestration and reinforcement learning models to optimize customer interactions dynamically. Experimental evaluation demonstrates significant improvements over traditional AI-based customer service systems, including 38% higher operational efficiency, 41% reduction in service escalations, 32% improvement in customer satisfaction, and 57% fewer compliance violations. The framework also enhances observability accuracy, service continuity, adaptive transparency, and enterprise resilience in multi-cloud environments. The study concludes that sustainable Zero-Touch Customer Experience systems must balance autonomy, governance, explainability, resilience, and human oversight to ensure trustworthy and regulation-compliant autonomous enterprise services.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican International Journal of Computer Science and TechnologySame topicAI in Service InteractionsFrench-language works237,207