← Back to all news
arXiv AI By Kangjia Zhao, Jiajun Li, Haozhan Shen, Wei Chow, Linfeng Li, Hang Song, Lingdong Kong, Chen Zhi, Tiancheng Zhao, Songhua Liu, Jianwei Yin

Calibration is the Bottleneck: An Action-Class Diagnostic of Multi-Turn Tool-Calling

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The paper introduces an action‑class diagnostic framework for multi‑turn tool‑calling in large language model agents, breaking failures into action‑class miscalibration and action‑execution failure across a four‑class action space (TOOL_CALL, ASK, REFUSE, CONFIRM). It defines a self‑revealing upper bound (Acc GAR) to expose state‑grader masking of miscalibration and shows that miscalibration is a significant, previously hidden failure mode, especially for heavily tool‑trained families. The study demonstrates that calibration can be reshaped by context‑only perturbations, but the effects vary widely across models and perturbation mechanisms, underscoring the need for diagnostics beyond aggregate accuracy.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

Related stories

arXiv AI
Aug 26

ToolRobustBench: Stage-Wise Perturbation Evaluation and Failure Diagnosis for Tool-Calling Agents

ToolRobustBench is a stage-wise diagnostic benchmark designed to evaluate and diagnose failures in tool‑calling agents, which are large language models that select tools, provide structured arguments, and interpret tool feedback. The benchmark aligns four perturbation families—tool‑interface, user‑intent, tool‑output/observation, and runtime‑environment—with the tool‑use pipeline, attributing failures to specific stages such as tool selection, schema grounding, argument binding, and feedback handling. Experiments across 15,456 instances, 7 models, and 16 local tools reveal that while overall performance is high, robustness degrades significantly, especially under tool‑output/observation perturbations, and mixed‑family perturbations produce non‑additive failure patterns.

By YiShan Zheng, Yuan Wu, Yi Chang
llmsagentsbenchmarks
More like this →
arXiv AI
5d ago

Action-Space Shaping for LLM Agents: Measuring and Mitigating Tool-Schema Bias

The paper investigates how the representation of tool interfaces—referred to as a tool schema—affects the performance of large language model agents. By systematically transforming a native tool schema with nine operators, the authors demonstrate that agents exhibit significant variability in success rates across different but functionally equivalent schema variants, a phenomenon they call schema bias. Experiments on eleven LLMs, including closed models, reveal that success can range from complete failure to 97% solely due to schema differences, and that training only mitigates bias when the specific variant is included in the training data.

By Yinhong Liu, Zhili Tan, Zilin Wang, Zhijiang Guo
llmsagentssafety
More like this →