The Argument is the Explanation: Structured Argumentation for Trust in Agents

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.03442v1
• Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2025 19:04:15 GMT
• Title: The Argument is the Explanation: Structured Argumentation for Trust in Agents
• Abstract summary: Humans are black boxes -- we cannot observe their neural processes, yet society functions by evaluating verifiable arguments.<n>We propose using structured argumentation to provide a level of explanation and verification.<n>Our pipeline achieves state-of-the-art 94.44 macro F1 on the AAEC published train/test split.
• Score: 27.3171971392448
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Humans are black boxes -- we cannot observe their neural processes, yet society functions by evaluating verifiable arguments. AI explainability should follow this principle: stakeholders need verifiable reasoning chains, not mechanistic transparency. We propose using structured argumentation to provide a level of explanation and verification neither interpretability nor LLM-generated explanation is able to offer. Our pipeline achieves state-of-the-art 94.44 macro F1 on the AAEC published train/test split (5.7 points above prior work) and $0.81$ macro F1, $\sim$0.07 above previous published results with comparable data setups, for Argumentative MicroTexts relation classification, converting LLM text into argument graphs and enabling verification at each inferential step. We demonstrate this idea on multi-agent risk assessment using the Structured What-If Technique, where specialized agents collaborate transparently to carry out risk assessment otherwise achieved by humans alone. Using Bipolar Assumption-Based Argumentation, we capture support/attack relationships, thereby enabling automatic hallucination detection via fact nodes attacking arguments. We also provide a verification mechanism that enables iterative refinement through test-time feedback without retraining. For easy deployment, we provide a Docker container for the fine-tuned AMT model, and the rest of the code with the Bipolar ABA Python package on GitHub.

Related papers

• Zero-Knowledge Predicate Proofs Between AI Agents: A Measured, Cross-Protocol Gateway and the Source-Integrity Gap [0.0]
  Multi-agent AI platforms move quickly from staging to production, but the way agents establish trust remains rudimentary.<n>We take provable data minimisation between agents from proposal to running system.<n>A 32-bit threshold predicate proves in 6.2 ms and verifies in 1.0 ms with a 608-byte Bulletproofs proof.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-30T23:16:17Z)
• VASO: Formally Verifiable Self-Evolving Skills for Physical AI Agents [57.240036084348354]
  We introduce VASO, a framework for verification-guided self-evolution of robot skill contracts.<n>VASO verifies logically inconsistent skill contracts, then verifies plans induced by the skill against global and local temporal specifications.<n>On Clearpath Jackal and PX4 quadcopter tasks, VASO reaches 97.2% formal-specification compliance using fewer than 100 optimization samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-03T20:02:35Z)
• Governing What You Cannot Observe: Adaptive Runtime Governance for Autonomous AI Agents [0.0]
  Autonomous AI agents can remain fully authorized and still become unsafe as behavior drifts, adversaries adapt, and decision patterns shift without any code change.<n>We propose the textbfInformational Viability Principle: governing an agent reduces to estimating a bound on unobserved risk.<n>textbfRiskGate instantiates the framework with dedicated statistical estimators (KL divergence, segment-vs-rest $z$-tests, sequential pattern matching), a fail-secure monotonic pipeline, and a closed-loop Autopilot.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-27T16:46:15Z)
• Dynamic analysis enhances issue resolution [53.50448142467294]
  DAIRA (Dynamic Analysis-enhanced Issue Resolution Agent) is an automated repair framework that embeds dynamic analysis into the agent's reasoning cycle.<n> Driven by a Test Tracing-Driven methodology, DAIRA utilizes lightweight monitors to extract critical runtime data.<n>When powered by Gemini 3 Flash Preview, DAIRA establishes a new state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance, achieving a 79.4% resolution rate on the SWE-bench Verified dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-23T14:48:54Z)
• AEGIS: From Clues to Verdicts -- Graph-Guided Deep Vulnerability Reasoning via Dialectics and Meta-Auditing [9.271196825503417]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted for vulnerability detection, yet their reasoning remains fundamentally unsound.<n>We present AEGIS, a novel multi-agent framework that shifts detection from ungrounded speculation to forensic verification over a closed factual substrate.<n>It reduces the false positive rate by up to 54.40% compared to leading baselines, at an average cost of $0.09 per sample without any task-specific training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-21T04:12:04Z)
• MedBeads: An Agent-Native, Immutable Data Substrate for Trustworthy Medical AI [0.0]
  As of 2026, Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate expert-level medical knowledge.<n> deploying them as autonomous "Clinical Agents" remains limited.<n>We propose MedBeads, an agent-native data infrastructure where clinical events are immutable "Beads"
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-01T08:03:20Z)
• Paper2Rebuttal: A Multi-Agent Framework for Transparent Author Response Assistance [23.470768802111007]
  $textbfRebuttalAgent$ is a new multi-agents framework that reframes rebuttal generation as an evidence-centric planning task.<n>Our system decomposes complex feedback into atomic concerns and dynamically constructs hybrid contexts.<n>By generating an inspectable response plan before drafting, $textbfRebuttalAgent$ ensures that every argument is explicitly anchored in internal or external evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-20T17:23:51Z)
• Reasoning is a Modality [4.055765634948606]
  We study abstract reasoning, an ability central to human intelligence.<n>Modern AI systems operate as sequence-of-behavior prediction machines.<n>Humans can explain an action by decoding internal state, while AI systems can produce fluent post-hoc rationalizations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-20T03:37:17Z)
• From Harm to Help: Turning Reasoning In-Context Demos into Assets for Reasoning LMs [58.02809208460186]
  We revisit this paradox using high-quality traces from DeepSeek-R1 as demonstrations.<n>We find that adding more exemplars consistently degrades accuracy, even when demonstrations are optimal.<n>We introduce Insight-to-solve (I2S), a sequential test-time procedure that turns demonstrations into explicit, reusable insights.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-27T08:59:31Z)
• Deceptive Automated Interpretability: Language Models Coordinating to Fool Oversight Systems [0.0]
  We show that language models can generate deceptive explanations that evade detection.<n>Our agents employ steganographic methods to hide information in seemingly innocent explanations.<n>All tested LLM agents were capable of deceiving the overseer while achieving high interpretability scores comparable to those of reference labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T15:07:10Z)
• Evaluating Evidence Attribution in Generated Fact Checking Explanations [48.776087871960584]
  We introduce a novel evaluation protocol -- citation masking and recovery.<n>We implement our protocol using both human annotators and automatic annotators.<n>Experiments reveal that the best-performing LLMs still generate explanations with inaccurate attributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T14:13:13Z)
• Fact Checking Beyond Training Set [64.88575826304024]
  We show that the retriever-reader suffers from performance deterioration when it is trained on labeled data from one domain and used in another domain. We propose an adversarial algorithm to make the retriever component robust against distribution shift. We then construct eight fact checking scenarios from these datasets, and compare our model to a set of strong baseline models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-27T15:15:14Z)
• Plausible Extractive Rationalization through Semi-Supervised Entailment Signal [29.67884478799914]
  We take a semi-supervised approach to optimize for the plausibility of extracted rationales. We adopt a pre-trained natural language inference (NLI) model and further fine-tune it on a small set of supervised rationales. We show that, by enforcing the alignment agreement between the explanation and answer in a question-answering task, the performance can be improved without access to ground truth labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-13T14:12:32Z)
• CASA: Causality-driven Argument Sufficiency Assessment [79.13496878681309]
  We propose CASA, a zero-shot causality-driven argument sufficiency assessment framework. PS measures how likely introducing the premise event would lead to the conclusion when both the premise and conclusion events are absent. Experiments on two logical fallacy detection datasets demonstrate that CASA accurately identifies insufficient arguments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-10T16:21:18Z)
• SelfCheckGPT: Zero-Resource Black-Box Hallucination Detection for Generative Large Language Models [55.60306377044225]
  "SelfCheckGPT" is a simple sampling-based approach to fact-check the responses of black-box models. We investigate this approach by using GPT-3 to generate passages about individuals from the WikiBio dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-15T19:31:21Z)
• Argumentative Explanations for Pattern-Based Text Classifiers [15.81939090849456]
  We focus on explanations for a specific interpretable model, namely pattern-based logistic regression (PLR) for binary text classification. We propose AXPLR, a novel explanation method using (forms of) computational argumentation to generate explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-22T21:16:49Z)
• Exploring Explainable Selection to Control Abstractive Summarization [51.74889133688111]
  We develop a novel framework that focuses on explainability. A novel pair-wise matrix captures the sentence interactions, centrality, and attribute scores. A sentence-deployed attention mechanism in the abstractor ensures the final summary emphasizes the desired content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-24T14:39:34Z)

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.