AI-Supported Platform for System Monitoring and Decision-Making in Nuclear Waste Management with Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.21741v1
• Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 20:29:53 GMT
• Title: AI-Supported Platform for System Monitoring and Decision-Making in Nuclear Waste Management with Large Language Models
• Authors: Dongjune Chang, Sola Kim, Young Soo Park,
• Abstract summary: This paper presents a multi-agent Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) system that integrates large language models (LLMs) with document retrieval mechanisms.<n>The system ensures regulatory decisions remain factually grounded, dynamically adapting to evolving regulatory frameworks.
• Score: 1.6795461001108096
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Nuclear waste management requires rigorous regulatory compliance assessment, demanding advanced decision-support systems capable of addressing complex legal, environmental, and safety considerations. This paper presents a multi-agent Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) system that integrates large language models (LLMs) with document retrieval mechanisms to enhance decision accuracy through structured agent collaboration. Through a structured 10-round discussion model, agents collaborate to assess regulatory compliance and safety requirements while maintaining document-grounded responses. Implemented on consumer-grade hardware, the system leverages Llama 3.2 and mxbai-embed-large-v1 embeddings for efficient retrieval and semantic representation. A case study of a proposed temporary nuclear waste storage site near Winslow, Arizona, demonstrates the framework's effectiveness. Results show the Regulatory Agent achieves consistently higher relevance scores in maintaining alignment with legal frameworks, while the Safety Agent effectively manages complex risk assessments requiring multifaceted analysis. The system demonstrates progressive improvement in agreement rates between agents across discussion rounds while semantic drift decreases, indicating enhanced decision-making consistency and response coherence. The system ensures regulatory decisions remain factually grounded, dynamically adapting to evolving regulatory frameworks through real-time document retrieval. By balancing automated assessment with human oversight, this framework offers a scalable and transparent approach to regulatory governance. These findings underscore the potential of AI-driven, multi-agent systems in advancing evidence-based, accountable, and adaptive decision-making for high-stakes environmental management scenarios.

Related papers

• From Reports to Reality: Testing Consistency in Instagram's Digital Services Act Compliance Data [0.0]
  The Digital Services Act (DSA) introduces rules for content moderation and platform governance in the European Union.<n>This study examined compliance with DSA requirements, focusing on Instagram.<n>We develop and apply a multi-level consistency framework to evaluate DSA compliance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-02T15:13:25Z)
• Towards Robust Fact-Checking: A Multi-Agent System with Advanced Evidence Retrieval [1.515687944002438]
  The rapid spread of misinformation in the digital era poses significant challenges to public discourse.<n>Traditional human-led fact-checking methods, while credible, struggle with the volume and velocity of online content.<n>This paper proposes a novel multi-agent system for automated fact-checking that enhances accuracy, efficiency, and explainability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-22T02:39:27Z)
• Explainable AI Systems Must Be Contestable: Here's How to Make It Happen [2.5875936082584623]
  This paper presents the first rigorous formal definition of contestability in explainable AI.<n>We introduce a modular framework of by-design and post-hoc mechanisms spanning human-centered interfaces, technical processes, and organizational architectures.<n>Our work equips practitioners with the tools to embed genuine recourse and accountability into AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-02T13:32:05Z)
• MSDA: Combining Pseudo-labeling and Self-Supervision for Unsupervised Domain Adaptation in ASR [59.83547898874152]
  We introduce a sample-efficient, two-stage adaptation approach that integrates self-supervised learning with semi-supervised techniques.<n>MSDA is designed to enhance the robustness and generalization of ASR models.<n>We demonstrate that Meta PL can be applied effectively to ASR tasks, achieving state-of-the-art results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T14:46:05Z)
• 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)
• AUTOLAW: Enhancing Legal Compliance in Large Language Models via Case Law Generation and Jury-Inspired Deliberation [5.732271982985626]
  AutoLaw is a novel violation detection framework for domain-specific large language models (LLMs)<n>It combines adversarial data generation with a jury-inspired deliberation process to enhance legal compliance of LLMs.<n>Our results highlight the framework's ability to adaptively probe legal misalignments and deliver reliable, context-aware judgments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T07:09:13Z)
• Human-AI Governance (HAIG): A Trust-Utility Approach [0.0]
  This paper introduces the HAIG framework for analysing trust dynamics across evolving human-AI relationships.<n>Our analysis reveals how technical advances in self-supervision, reasoning authority, and distributed decision-making drive non-uniform trust evolution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-03T01:57:08Z)
• The Great Nugget Recall: Automating Fact Extraction and RAG Evaluation with Large Language Models [53.12387628636912]
  We propose an automatic evaluation framework that is validated against human annotations.<n>This approach was originally developed for the TREC Question Answering (QA) Track in 2003.<n>We observe strong agreement at the run level between scores derived from fully automatic nugget evaluation and human-based variants.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T12:55:06Z)
• AlignRAG: Leveraging Critique Learning for Evidence-Sensitive Retrieval-Augmented Reasoning [61.28113271728859]
  RAG has become a widely adopted paradigm for enabling knowledge-grounded large language models (LLMs)<n>Standard RAG pipelines often fail to ensure that model reasoning remains consistent with the evidence retrieved, leading to factual inconsistencies or unsupported conclusions.<n>In this work, we reinterpret RAG as Retrieval-Augmented Reasoning and identify a central but underexplored problem: textitReasoning Misalignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T04:56:47Z)
• Media and responsible AI governance: a game-theoretic and LLM analysis [61.132523071109354]
  This paper investigates the interplay between AI developers, regulators, users, and the media in fostering trustworthy AI systems.<n>Using evolutionary game theory and large language models (LLMs), we model the strategic interactions among these actors under different regulatory regimes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-12T21:39:38Z)
• AgentOrca: A Dual-System Framework to Evaluate Language Agents on Operational Routine and Constraint Adherence [54.317522790545304]
  We present AgentOrca, a dual-system framework for evaluating language agents' compliance with operational constraints and routines.<n>Our framework encodes action constraints and routines through both natural language prompts for agents and corresponding executable code serving as ground truth for automated verification.<n>Our findings reveal notable performance gaps among state-of-the-art models, with large reasoning models like o1 demonstrating superior compliance while others show significantly lower performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-11T17:53:02Z)
• Agent-as-a-Judge: Evaluate Agents with Agents [61.33974108405561]
  We introduce the Agent-as-a-Judge framework, wherein agentic systems are used to evaluate agentic systems. This is an organic extension of the LLM-as-a-Judge framework, incorporating agentic features that enable intermediate feedback for the entire task-solving process. We present DevAI, a new benchmark of 55 realistic automated AI development tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T17:57:02Z)
• RIRAG: Regulatory Information Retrieval and Answer Generation [51.998738311700095]
  We introduce a task of generating question-passages pairs, where questions are automatically created and paired with relevant regulatory passages.<n>We create the ObliQA dataset, containing 27,869 questions derived from the collection of Abu Dhabi Global Markets (ADGM) financial regulation documents.<n>We design a baseline Regulatory Information Retrieval and Answer Generation (RIRAG) system and evaluate it with RePASs, a novel evaluation metric.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-09T14:44:19Z)
• Rethinking Legal Compliance Automation: Opportunities with Large Language Models [2.9088208525097365]
  We argue that the examination of (textual) legal artifacts should, first employ broader context than sentences. We present a compliance analysis approach designed to address these limitations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-22T17:10:27Z)
• Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence and Process Mining: Challenges and Opportunities [0.8602553195689513]
  We show that process mining can provide a useful framework for gaining fact-based visibility to AI compliance process execution. We provide for an automated approach to analyze, remediate and monitor uncertainty in AI regulatory compliance processes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-06T12:50:47Z)

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.