arXiv:2608.23638v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Two analysts who calibrate the same predictive model on independent samples will deploy different prediction sets every time, because the calibration...
arXiv:2608. 12489v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Organizations decide whom to treat under a budget and want to know what a targeting rule would have earned before deploying it.
arXiv:2606. 29654v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Multi-agent deliberation among LLMs can improve reasoning, but deployment requires deciding when the current answer is reliable enough to act on and when it should be escalated to human review.
arXiv:2606. 15153v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Selective prediction with distribution-free risk control promises that, with confidence 1-delta over the calibration draw, the error rate of accepted inputs stays below a user budget alpha.
arXiv:2607. 18088v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Standard evaluation of many recognition systems contains distribution shift by construction, since benchmarks place disjoint conditions in the training and test splits.
arXiv:2609.01108v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: TRACE (Math & Lienhart, arXiv:2602.01135) reads causal graphs over event types out of a pretrained autoregressive sequence model by thresholding a per-...
arXiv:2606. 29054v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) deployed for structured generation (NER, JSON extraction, QA, and classification) lack formal reliability guarantees, and standard heuristic abstention policies miss user-specified risk targets by 7.
arXiv:2606. 20115v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Conformal risk control (CRC) provides distribution-free guarantees on segmentation quality by calibrating a prediction-set threshold on held-out data.
The paper investigates the reliability of tool‑using agents, focusing on two failure modes: selecting the wrong tool and constructing incorrect arguments. It introduces a correct‑invocation rate metric to distinguish these errors and evaluates five open‑weight models on multi‑step tasks up to depth 8, finding that by depth 6 about 70% of a model’s clean‑context capability is lost due to earlier mistakes. The study reveals that exact‑match scoring against a fixed gold trajectory forces severity and recovery parameters to extreme values, and proposes a conditional‑on‑state scoring remedy that yields more realistic severity estimates.
The paper investigates the safety of Code World Models, where a language model generates executable world models that a planner uses. It shows that accepting a model based on sampled transitions only guarantees sample consistency, not full safety, because the probability of missing critical events decays as (1‑r)^N. Experiments on hybrid instruments reveal that omitted mode‑boundaries can severely limit planner performance, and that even sophisticated LLMs (GPT‑5.x) struggle to repair such omissions in higher‑dimensional settings.
arXiv:2608. 07914v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Behavioral contamination detectors can return "no evidence" either because a benchmark is clean or because the audit has little power.
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.