📡 今日研究情报 外部信息 → 筛选 → 阅读 → 价值判断 → 趋势 → 思想

基本信息

原始数据层(AI 与用户都不会覆盖这些字段)
🌍 国际 技术进展 AI 状态:已分析 综合价值 3.8 / 5
来源
arXiv 人工智能预印本(Atom)(arXiv · INTL)
发布时间
2026-10-06 16:22
采集时间
2026-10-07 10:09
语言
en
地域置信度
65%
原始链接
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.07948v1
内容指纹
eeb969960089339b540f9c428e309c399826e942a47ac6e4a74619378afc5725

AI 整理

分析于 2026-10-07 10:10(第 1 版,来源:offline)

When using an LLM agent in a consequential domain, making an informed decision about whether to trust its output or intervene requires calibrated confidence in the agent's success.

为什么值得关注:属于技术进展,可能扩散到其他领域

趋势标签: confidence agent trajectory estimation

我的价值判断与记录

系统判断的重要性与你的判断同时保存(§27),永不互相覆盖
详情 原文

添加记录

评论不会自动变成正式思想,需要在「思想输入」页主动确认沉淀(§41)

还没有记录。阅读后写下你的评论、启发与后续行动 —— 这是系统最终真正积累的部分。

用户纠错

原始信息 + 用户意见 + 修正结果分别记录,便于审计;系统不会自动改原始数据

原始内容

仅在合法且采集到正文时显示;否则请查看原文链接
When using an LLM agent in a consequential domain, making an informed decision about whether to trust its output or intervene requires calibrated confidence in the agent's success. Confidence estimation for agents is difficult because evidence about success is distributed across heterogeneous, interdependent steps of an agent's trajectory. Practical agentic deployments introduce further challenges: frontier LLMs often provide limited access to internal signals, agent roll-outs are costly, and training data may be unavailable or quickly become outdated. To address these challenges, we introduce Confidence Reasoning Graphs (CRGs), an inference-time framework that estimates the probability an agent accomplished its task from a single trajectory, without privileged model access or training data. Rather than compressing an execution into a single holistic judgment, a CRG begins with the claim that the agent accomplished its task, decomposes it into contextualized sub-claims grounded in trajectory evidence, estimates confidence for each terminal claim, and finally aggregates these into an overall confidence estimate. Across three agentic benchmarks, three backbone models, and three agent frameworks, CRGs yield better-calibrated confidence and stronger risk-aware decision making than verbalized, sampling-based, and white-box surrogate baselines. We further find that calibration error alone can be misleading: a white-box surrogate baseline appears well calibrated while providing near-chance discrimination. Ablations attribute CRG's improvements to claim-level confidence estimation and aggregation rather than graph construction alone. Finally, a CRG exposes the claims and trajectory evidence underlying each confidence estimate, enabling it to be audited at decision time.

事件演化

同一事件的后续报道、状态变化与版本记录
2026-10-06 首次出现
Confidence Reasoning Graphs: Structured Confidence Estimation for LLM Agents

暂无后续版本记录。当你把该信息加入「跟踪」后,后续采集到的相关报道会归并到这里。

门户首页