PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Artificial Intelligence Review· 2025Q1· Review

Agentic AI: a comprehensive survey of architectures, applications, and future directions

Mohamad Abou Ali, Fadi Dornaika, Jinan Charafeddine

Short summary

A novel dual-paradigm framework categorizes agentic AI systems into symbolic/classical and neural/generative lineages, based on a PRISMA review of 90 studies (2018-2025).

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Agentic AI systems are categorized into two distinct lineages: symbolic/classical and neural/generative.
  • Symbolic systems excel in safety-critical domains (e.g., healthcare), while neural systems are prevalent in adaptive, data-rich environments (e.g., finance).
  • A PRISMA-based review of 90 studies (2018-2025) underpins the analysis of architectures, applications, and ethical challenges.
  • Critical research gaps include governance models for symbolic systems and the need for hybrid neuro-symbolic architectures.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Abstract Agentic AI represents a transformative shift in artificial intelligence, but its rapid advancement has led to a fragmented understanding, often conflating modern neural systems with outdated symbolic models—a practice known as conceptual retrofitting . This survey cuts through this confusion by introducing a novel dual-paradigm framework that categorizes agentic systems into two distinct lineages: the symbolic/classical (relying on algorithmic planning and persistent state) and the neural/generative (leveraging stochastic generation and prompt-driven orchestration). Through a systematic PRISMA-based review of 90 studies (2018–2025), we provide a comprehensive analysis structured around this framework across three dimensions: (1) the theoretical foundations and architectural principles defining each paradigm; (2) domain-specific implementations in healthcare, finance, and robotics, demonstrating how application constraints dictate paradigm selection; and (3) paradigm-specific ethical and governance challenges, revealing divergent risks and mitigation strategies. Our analysis reveals that the choice of paradigm is strategic: symbolic systems dominate safety-critical domains (e.g., healthcare), while neural systems prevail in adaptive, data-rich environments (e.g., finance). Furthermore, we identify critical research gaps, including a significant deficit in governance models for symbolic systems and a pressing need for hybrid neuro-symbolic architectures. The findings culminate in a strategic roadmap arguing that the future of Agentic AI lies not in the dominance of one paradigm, but in their intentional integration to create systems that are both adaptable and reliable . This work provides the essential conceptual toolkit to guide future research, development, and policy toward robust and trustworthy hybrid intelligent systems.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Artificial Intelligence Review, 2025 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Artificial Intelligence

Artificial IntelligenceComputer Science