Abstract:Bot detectors deployed at scale treat traffic as binary: human or bot. This assumption breaks when AI agents browse the web through browser automation, a traffic class that is neither and that binary classifiers structurally cannot represent. We present a three-class detection framework distinguishing humans, bots, and AI agents, and show that the binary-vs-agent confusion is architectural: a binary human-vs-bot detector misroutes agent sessions because its label space lacks an agent class. On our controlled benchmark, an MLP binary classifier misclassifies 39.1% of real AI agents as human and a SAINT binary transformer misclassifies 34.5%; adding an explicit agent class yields per-class agent F1 = 1.000 in all 30 runs (3 model families $\times$ 10 seeds). To measure evasion resistance, we construct a five-level evasion ladder spanning passive observation, GAN-generated trajectories, and replay of real human cursor data ($n = 2299$ evasion sessions). Across 10 seeds and 3 model families we observe zero agent misses in 22990 per-seed predictions. The discriminative signal is a browser-automation artifact, not evidence of agent reasoning: Playwright does not emit the raw pointer-move and wheel-delta streams a physical input device produces, and this absence signature survives trajectory manipulation. Exhaustive search over all feature subsets of size 1-5 (9401 GBMs) shows that two behavioral features (mouse_event_rate, teleport_click_ratio) give 100% observed agent recall at every evasion level with agent precision 0.994; five features lift macro-F1 to 0.991. The signal is redundantly encoded: removing teleport_click_ratio leaves agent detection at 100%. The single-feature regime is degenerate, flagging every agent only by collapsing the classifier to always predict "agent". Two features robustly isolate agents; five separate all three traffic classes at macro-F1 $\geq 0.99$.
Abstract:We introduce the first formal model capturing the elicitation of unverifiable information from a party (the "source") with implicit signals derived by other players (the "observers"). Our model is motivated in part by applications in decentralized physical infrastructure networks (a.k.a. "DePIN"), an emerging application domain in which physical services (e.g., sensor information, bandwidth, or energy) are provided at least in part by untrusted and self-interested parties. A key challenge in these signal network applications is verifying the level of service that was actually provided by network participants. We first establish a condition called source identifiability, which we show is necessary for the existence of a mechanism for which truthful signal reporting is a strict equilibrium. For a converse, we build on techniques from peer prediction to show that in every signal network that satisfies the source identifiability condition, there is in fact a strictly truthful mechanism, where truthful signal reporting gives strictly higher total expected payoff than any less informative equilibrium. We furthermore show that this truthful equilibrium is in fact the unique equilibrium of the mechanism if there is positive probability that any one observer is unconditionally honest (e.g., if an observer were run by the network owner). Also, by extending our condition to coalitions, we show that there are generally no collusion-resistant mechanisms in the settings that we consider. We apply our framework and results to two DePIN applications: proving location, and proving bandwidth. In the location-proving setting observers learn (potentially enlarged) Euclidean distances to the source. Here, our condition has an appealing geometric interpretation, implying that the source's location can be truthfully elicited if and only if it is guaranteed to lie inside the convex hull of the observers.