KY.LinkedIn ↗
Researcher · Engineer · EntrepreneurSan Francisco, CA

Kiran
Yenaganti.

I build data systems and research how AI agents should act.
My focus: runtime governance and multi-agent orchestration.

My story ↓
Featured researchEvidence-Bound Runtime Governance
for Autonomous Multi-Agent AI Systems
Kiran overlooking a lake and mountain landscape

In January 2019, I left India at 22. It was my first flight.

I knew nobody where I was going and had not booked even one night in a hotel. As the plane descended, I remember looking down at snow on the houses. Everything felt unfamiliar. I wanted a better life and a chance to build something. I had little idea how to begin.

Techworkify was my first entrepreneurial venture, focused on technology staffing through HyperLedger OÜ in Estonia. COVID and travel restrictions interrupted my plans and prevented me from moving the venture forward as intended.

I later completed my master’s in Entrepreneurship & Innovation at Hult International Business School in San Francisco. In 2025, I founded DataGovernAI LLC.

My background in data engineering also shaped my interest in AI systems. While developing a concept for an AI leasing assistant, I became interested in the decisions behind the conversation.

The concept involved an assistant that would look up availability and help schedule tours. That raised questions about outdated information, incorrect assumptions passed between agents, and actions that required human approval.

Those questions led to my patent application and my focus on runtime governance. I now study how agents coordinate work, check evidence, and involve people in decisions. I pursue these questions through independent research, doctoral studies in information technology, and my HOMININI prototype.

The question I study

Permission is only
part of the decision.

A conceptual view of evidence-bound execution.

01

Proposed action

An agent identifies the next step.

02

Policy check

Is the action permitted?

03

Evidence check

Is the supporting information sufficient?

Proceed when justifiedPause or seek human review
02 / Research & invention

Before an agent acts,
what should it know?

Research manuscriptPublic release · ResearchGate

Evidence-Bound Runtime Governance for Autonomous Multi-Agent AI Systems

Policy Enforcement, Monitoring, and Risk-Based Human Escalation

An action can be permitted and still rely on incomplete or outdated information. My paper examines the evidence checks and human escalation needed at execution time.

Read on ResearchGate ↗
U.S. patent applicationFiled July 15, 2025

Governed multi-agent workflows

The application describes an architecture for coordinating specialized agents with real-time data integration, governance checks, audit records, and fallback mechanisms. It grew out of the virtual leasing use case that first drew me to this problem.

Application title and filing details

System and Method for Governed Multi-Agent AI Workflow with Real-Time Data Integration and Session-Aware Voice Automation.

Named inventor: Kiran Kumar Yenaganti
Nonprovisional utility application: 19/269,037
Filing date: July 15, 2025

A running interface can still fail to explain what stopped, what happened, or whether any useful work was completed.

HOMININI is the experimental system I use to investigate that gap. This repair addressed a narrow but consequential failure: an owner asked why work had stopped, and the system returned an acknowledgement instead of an answer.

Recorded production state
13recorded cycle
12configured maximum

These counters record execution cycles. They do not establish 13 useful outcomes.

The repair

The diagnosis path now resolves the current operational goal, reads its recorded state, explains the execution boundary, and preserves uncertainty when the goal is missing or ambiguous. It does not restart work or grant execution authority.

Behavior covered by regression tests

The repair routes the original diagnostic request to diagnosis rather than acknowledgement; handles conflicting history and multiple goals without guessing; denies restricted access before reading host runtime; and avoids an unnecessary historical scan.

Controlled regression suite56 passeddeveloper-run verification
Suite duration6.75 snot user-response latency
Scope and limitations

The developer-reported results cover the broader gateway and diagnosis helper, not 56 independent demonstrations of productivity. The tests use a temporary local database, controlled fixtures, mocks, and an action callback that records attempted execution. They establish the specified diagnostic behaviors; they do not demonstrate autonomous productivity, general natural-language understanding, comprehensive security, scientific novelty, or superiority over another system.

A recorded live Portal check returned the iteration-limit explanation without starting a mission. The local evidence has not yet been sanitized into a public reproduction package.

Data engineering

Azure · Databricks · Python · SQL

My technical background includes data pipelines, transformation, and data quality. These are the foundations that other systems rely on.

University of the Cumberlands

Ph.D., Information Technology

In progress · AI emphasis

Hult International Business School

MSc, Entrepreneurship & Innovation

San Francisco

Research / Technical exchange

Get in touch.

For research collaboration and technical discussions, reach me on LinkedIn.

Open my LinkedIn profile ↗