arXiv:2608. 20116v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in settings where textual summaries, numerical observations, and external tool outputs may provide conflicting evidence.
arXiv:2604. 02118v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Natural language explanations of time series data are increasingly produced by foundation models in high stakes domains, making factual correctness critical.
arXiv:2606. 01120v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In RAG-based fact-checking, LLMs are increasingly used as verifiers to check given claims against retrieved evidence.
arXiv:2607. 18240v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can achieve strong fact-checking accuracy, yet forced binary decisions conceal a critical reliability problem: systems may issue confident verdicts even when supporting evidence is weak, sparse, or internally inconsistent.
arXiv:2606. 22030v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We investigate when belief-based memory actually improves large language model (LLM) agents.
arXiv:2606. 26437v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Existing metrics for factuality and faithfulness evaluate whether an answer is supported or contradicted by its grounding documents, but they fail to capture when both supporting and contradicting evidence coexist.
Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled sophisticated reasoning and content generation, yet their inherent stochasticity poses significant challenges for ensuring predictive credibility. While traditional uncertainty taxonomy paradigms, such as the dichotomy of aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties, provide conceptual foundations, they often fail to capture the multi-component and multi-stage nature of LLM generation and struggle to evaluate the effectiveness of various Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) methods.
arXiv:2608. 14509v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Systems that ask a language model to reach a conclusion from many sources usually concatenate them into one prompt.
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly act as integrated data-science agents, combining abstract reasoning with advanced tool use. Yet the relevant benchmark landscape largely divides into symbolic causal reasoning benchmarks without realistic data analysis or data analysis benchmarks without a principled causal data-generating structure.
arXiv:2607. 08093v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly act as integrated data-science agents, combining abstract reasoning with advanced tool use.
Large Language Models (LLMs) generate fluent long-form text, however, often add unsupported factual claims. Existing verification techniques improve factuality by grounding generation in external evidence.
arXiv:2607. 12650v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool access alone does not make LLM empirical reasoning governable: accepted outputs need not descend from attested evidence, and accepted deductions need not hold up under formal scrutiny.
arXiv:2607. 26512v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents can draft claims faster than authors can check whether the cited or retrieved evidence supports them.