Policy Frameworks for Transparent Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.14521v1
• Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 19:54:18 GMT
• Title: Policy Frameworks for Transparent Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Large Language Models
• Abstract summary: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning enhances large language models (LLMs) by decomposing complex problems into step-by-step solutions.<n>Current CoT disclosure policies vary widely across different models in visibility, API access, and pricing strategies, lacking a unified policy framework.<n>We propose a tiered-access policy framework that balances transparency, accountability, and security by tailoring CoT availability to academic, business, and general users.
• Score: 1.0088912103548195
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning enhances large language models (LLMs) by decomposing complex problems into step-by-step solutions, improving performance on reasoning tasks. However, current CoT disclosure policies vary widely across different models in frontend visibility, API access, and pricing strategies, lacking a unified policy framework. This paper analyzes the dual-edged implications of full CoT disclosure: while it empowers small-model distillation, fosters trust, and enables error diagnosis, it also risks violating intellectual property, enabling misuse, and incurring operational costs. We propose a tiered-access policy framework that balances transparency, accountability, and security by tailoring CoT availability to academic, business, and general users through ethical licensing, structured reasoning outputs, and cross-tier safeguards. By harmonizing accessibility with ethical and operational considerations, this framework aims to advance responsible AI deployment while mitigating risks of misuse or misinterpretation.

Related papers

• CLAIM: Leading Open-domain Active Clarification of Large Language Models with Uncertainty Measurement [50.91045324738942]
  CLAIM is an uncertainty-driven framework for active clarification learning in open-domain settings.<n>We propose an entropy-driven synthetic data generation pipeline that integrates uncertainty estimation with semantic clustering and reasoning-based judgments.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that CLAIM can learn stable and generalizable clarification strategies without relying on manually labeled data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-12T04:27:45Z)
• It Takes Two: Complementary Self-Distillation for Contextual Integrity in LLMs [73.46918128880786]
  Self-distillation framework that decouples information suppression from task resolution.<n>Self-distillation framework that decouples information suppression from task resolution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T13:57:44Z)
• Towards trustworthy agentic AI: a comprehensive survey of safety, robustness, privacy, and system security [57.35851886874902]
  Agentic AI systems execute complex tasks autonomously, but their multi-step trajectories introduce new failure modes that challenge trustworthiness.<n>This survey provides a focused examination of trustworthy agentic AI through two core dimensions that are critical for high-risk deployments.<n>For each dimension, we clarify key concepts, identify where risks emerge along the agent workflow, and summarize stage-targeted mitigation strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T10:26:37Z)
• Operationalizing Cybersecurity Governance for Mitigation Planning with Attack-Path Modeling and Reinforcement Learning [1.2885809002769635]
  We present a system that operationalizes governance frameworks by mapping CSF maturity assessments into MITRE ATT&CK mitigation capabilities.<n>To manage adversary complexity, we employ a Variable-Order Markov Model (VOMM) trained on observed ATT&CK technique sequences.<n>We show that the approach produces stable policies, meaningful cost-risk trade-offs, and interpretable mitigation plans aligned with organizational maturity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-10T22:26:53Z)
• GoAT-X: A Graph of Auditing Thoughts for Securing Token Transactions in Cross-Chain Contracts [52.51342355102833]
  Cross-chain bridges, the critical infrastructure of the multi-chain ecosystem, have become a primary target for attackers.<n>Existing defenses, such as bytecode-level static analysis, are ill-equipped to handle the semantic complexity of cross-chain interactions.<n>We propose GoAT-X, a framework that shifts automated cross-chain smart contracts auditing from pattern matching toward systematic first-principles verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-27T11:34:21Z)
• PolicyBank: Evolving Policy Understanding for LLM Agents [51.86716874651299]
  PolicyBank maintains structured, tool-level policy insights and iteratively refines them.<n>PolicyBank closes up to 82% of the gap toward a human oracle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-16T20:29:30Z)
• Chain-of-Authorization: Internalizing Authorization into Large Language Models via Reasoning Trajectories [21.063230721511726]
  Chain-of-Authorization (CoA) framework internalizes authorization logic into Large Language Models' core capabilities.<n>CoA integrates policy execution with task responses, making authorization a causal prerequisite for substantive responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-24T07:13:01Z)
• From Passive Metric to Active Signal: The Evolving Role of Uncertainty Quantification in Large Language Models [77.04403907729738]
  This survey charts the evolution of uncertainty from a passive diagnostic metric to an active control signal guiding real-time model behavior.<n>We demonstrate how uncertainty is leveraged as an active control signal across three frontiers.<n>This survey argues that mastering the new trend of uncertainty is essential for building the next generation of scalable, reliable, and trustworthy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-22T06:21:31Z)
• Reasoning Is All You Need for Urban Planning AI [3.3943213418026126]
  This paper presents the Agentic Urban Planning AI Framework for reasoning-capable planning agents.<n>It integrates three cognitive layers (Perception, Foundation, Reasoning) with six logic components (Analysis, Generation, Verification, Evaluation, Collaboration, Decision) through a multi-agents collaboration framework.<n>We show how AI agents can augment human planners by systematically exploring solution spaces, verifying regulatory compliance, and deliberating over trade-offs transparently.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-07T15:59:06Z)
• Safe and Compliant Cross-Market Trade Execution via Constrained RL and Zero-Knowledge Audits [0.5586191108738564]
  We present a cross-market algorithmic trading system that balances execution quality with rigorous compliance enforcement.<n>The architecture comprises a high-level planner, a reinforcement learning execution agent, and an independent compliance agent.<n>We report effects at the 95% confidence level using paired t-tests and examine tail risk via CVaR.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-06T15:52:12Z)
• FaithCoT-Bench: Benchmarking Instance-Level Faithfulness of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [62.452350134196934]
  FaithCoT-Bench is a unified benchmark for instance-level CoT unfaithfulness detection.<n>Our framework formulates unfaithfulness detection as a discriminative decision problem.<n>FaithCoT-Bench sets a solid basis for future research toward more interpretable and trustworthy reasoning in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-05T05:16:54Z)
• Co-Investigator AI: The Rise of Agentic AI for Smarter, Trustworthy AML Compliance Narratives [2.7295959384567356]
  Co-Investigator AI is an agentic framework optimized to produce Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) significantly faster and with greater accuracy than traditional methods.<n>We demonstrate its ability to streamline SAR drafting, align narratives with regulatory expectations, and enable compliance teams to focus on higher-order analytical work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-10T08:16:04Z)
• Foundations for Risk Assessment of AI in Protecting Fundamental Rights [0.5093073566064981]
  This chapter introduces a conceptual framework for qualitative risk assessment of AI.<n>It addresses the complexities of legal compliance and fundamental rights protection by itegrating definitional balancing and defeasible reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-24T10:52:22Z)
• Federated In-Context Learning: Iterative Refinement for Improved Answer Quality [62.72381208029899]
  In-context learning (ICL) enables language models to generate responses without modifying their parameters by leveraging examples provided in the input.<n>We propose Federated In-Context Learning (Fed-ICL), a general framework that enhances ICL through an iterative, collaborative process.<n>Fed-ICL progressively refines responses by leveraging multi-round interactions between clients and a central server, improving answer quality without the need to transmit model parameters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-09T05:33:28Z)
• Ethical AI: Towards Defining a Collective Evaluation Framework [0.3413711585591077]
  Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming sectors such as healthcare, finance, and autonomous systems.<n>Yet its rapid integration raises urgent ethical concerns related to data ownership, privacy, and systemic bias.<n>This article proposes a modular ethical assessment framework built on ontological blocks of meaning-discrete, interpretable units.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T21:10:47Z)
• Beyond Explainability: The Case for AI Validation [0.0]
  We argue for a shift toward validation as a central regulatory pillar.<n> Validation, ensuring the reliability, consistency, and robustness of AI outputs, offers a more practical, scalable, and risk-sensitive alternative to explainability.<n>We propose a forward-looking policy framework centered on pre- and post-deployment validation, third-party auditing, harmonized standards, and liability incentives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T06:42:41Z)
• Co-CoT: A Prompt-Based Framework for Collaborative Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [0.0]
  We propose an Interactive Chain-of-Thought (CoT) Framework that enhances human-centered explainability and responsible AI usage. The framework decomposes reasoning into clearly defined blocks that users can inspect, modify, and re-execute. Ethical transparency is ensured through explicit metadata disclosure, built-in bias checkpoint functionality, and privacy-preserving safeguards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-23T20:48:09Z)
• Are You Getting What You Pay For? Auditing Model Substitution in LLM APIs [60.881609323604685]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) accessed via black-box APIs introduce a trust challenge. Users pay for services based on advertised model capabilities. providers may covertly substitute the specified model with a cheaper, lower-quality alternative to reduce operational costs. This lack of transparency undermines fairness, erodes trust, and complicates reliable benchmarking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T03:57:41Z)
• Regulating Ai In Financial Services: Legal Frameworks And Compliance Challenges [0.0]
  Article examines the evolving landscape of artificial intelligence (AI) regulation in financial services.<n>It highlights how AI-driven processes, from fraud detection to algorithmic trading, offer efficiency gains yet introduce significant risks.<n>The study compares regulatory approaches across major jurisdictions such as the European Union, United States, and United Kingdom.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-17T14:29:09Z)
• Semantic Integrity Constraints: Declarative Guardrails for AI-Augmented Data Processing Systems [39.23499993745249]
  We introduce Semantic Integrity Constraints (SICs) to govern and optimize semantic operators within AI-augmented data processing systems. SICs integrate seamlessly into the relational model, allowing users to specify common classes of constraints. Our work establishes SICs as a foundational framework for trustworthy, high-performance AI-augmented data processing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-01T19:59:25Z)
• Towards Trustworthy Retrieval Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Survey [92.36487127683053]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is an advanced technique designed to address the challenges of Artificial Intelligence-Generated Content (AIGC) RAG provides reliable and up-to-date external knowledge, reduces hallucinations, and ensures relevant context across a wide range of tasks. Despite RAG's success and potential, recent studies have shown that the RAG paradigm also introduces new risks, including privacy concerns, adversarial attacks, and accountability issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-08T06:50:47Z)
• Deliberative Alignment: Reasoning Enables Safer Language Models [64.60765108418062]
  We introduce Deliberative Alignment, a new paradigm that teaches the model safety specifications and trains it to explicitly recall and accurately reason over the specifications before answering.<n>We used this approach to align OpenAI's o-series models, and achieved highly precise adherence to OpenAI's safety policies, without requiring human-written chain-of-thoughts or answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T21:00:11Z)
• Ethical and Scalable Automation: A Governance and Compliance Framework for Business Applications [0.0]
  This paper introduces a framework ensuring that AI must be ethical, controllable, viable, and desirable.<n>Different case studies validate this framework by integrating AI in both academic and practical environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-25T12:39:28Z)
• TRACE: TRansformer-based Attribution using Contrastive Embeddings in LLMs [50.259001311894295]
  We propose a novel TRansformer-based Attribution framework using Contrastive Embeddings called TRACE. We show that TRACE significantly improves the ability to attribute sources accurately, making it a valuable tool for enhancing the reliability and trustworthiness of large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-06T07:19:30Z)
• Investigating the Role of Instruction Variety and Task Difficulty in Robotic Manipulation Tasks [50.75902473813379]
  This work introduces a comprehensive evaluation framework that systematically examines the role of instructions and inputs in the generalisation abilities of such models. The proposed framework uncovers the resilience of multimodal models to extreme instruction perturbations and their vulnerability to observational changes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-04T14:36:49Z)
• Coordinated Flaw Disclosure for AI: Beyond Security Vulnerabilities [1.3225694028747144]
  We propose a Coordinated Flaw Disclosure framework tailored to the complexities of machine learning (ML) issues. Our framework introduces innovations such as extended model cards, dynamic scope expansion, an independent adjudication panel, and an automated verification process. We argue that CFD could significantly enhance public trust in AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-10T20:39:04Z)
• Data Poisoning for In-context Learning [49.77204165250528]
  In-context learning (ICL) has been recognized for its innovative ability to adapt to new tasks. This paper delves into the critical issue of ICL's susceptibility to data poisoning attacks. We introduce ICLPoison, a specialized attacking framework conceived to exploit the learning mechanisms of ICL.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-03T14:20:20Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.