arXiv:2607. 03847v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Understanding why discovered scenarios become critical in scenario-based testing is essential for effectively leveraging them in decision-making systems.
arXiv:2607. 01306v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Counterfactual explanations explain machine learning predictions by identifying minimal input changes that would alter a model's decision.
arXiv:2606. 04505v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Scientific simulators are increasingly being integrated into LLM-driven systems for high-stakes simulation-driven decision-making.
arXiv:2608. 08786v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly serve as data-driven reasoners, yet their chains-of-thought (CoT) can be unfaithful even when final answers are correct.
arXiv:2606. 16603v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based agents have demonstrated strong capabilities in data-intensive analytical tasks, yet their outputs are rarely verifiable: a reliance on linear text trajectories makes their reasoning difficult to audit.
The paper introduces DCFA, a training‑free framework for attributing failures in large language model‑based multi‑agent systems. DCFA uses a global module to build causal‑inspired dependency graphs from system traces, pinpointing the earliest decisive error, and a local module that refines this attribution through counterfactual reasoning. Experiments on the Who&When benchmark across six LLMs demonstrate that DCFA improves step‑level accuracy by up to 8.27% over existing baselines.
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.
arXiv:2510. 27544v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Current training paradigms, optimized for long-horizon reasoning trace execution, have made Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at pattern matching and forward simulation of reasoning, but underperform at counterfactual causal understanding and reasoning.
Context: Large Language Models (LLMs) offer natural-language flexibility for automated requirements elicitation but frequently generate structurally invalid requirements and logical inconsistencies, lacking formal correctness guarantees. Objectives: This study aims to eliminate logical inconsistencies and enforce structural conformance in LLM-generated requirements while quantifying the LLM's pre-validation decision uncertainty within a formal domain model.
arXiv:2608. 12877v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-hop fact verification, which verifies claims by reasoning over multiple pieces of evidence, is critical for combating misinformation on social media yet remains highly challenging.
arXiv:2607. 26220v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Context: Large Language Models (LLMs) offer natural-language flexibility for automated requirements elicitation but frequently generate structurally invalid requirements and logical inconsistencies, lacking formal correctness guarantees.
The paper introduces MedTraj, a framework that constructs, evaluates, and optimizes multi‑step reasoning trajectories for medical AI agents. It parses each trajectory into observations, evidence, numbered steps, and a conclusion, scoring them on coherence, evidence support, hallucination, completeness, and traceability. Experiments on CareQA, PubMedQA, and CECMed show that incorporating quality‑weighted trajectory context improves reasoning coherence and correctness while significantly reducing hallucinations.
arXiv:2511. 01650v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly entering specialized, safety-critical engineering workflows governed by strict quantitative standards and immutable physical laws, making rigorous evaluation of their reasoning capabilities imperative.