LLM-Based Agentic Negotiation for 6G: Addressing Uncertainty Neglect and Tail-Event Risk

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.19175v1
• Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2025 14:36:11 GMT
• Title: LLM-Based Agentic Negotiation for 6G: Addressing Uncertainty Neglect and Tail-Event Risk
• Authors: Hatim Chergui, Farhad Rezazadeh, Mehdi Bennis, Merouane Debbah,
• Abstract summary: This paper proposes an unbiased, risk-aware framework for agentic negotiation in 6G networks.<n>It shifts the agent's objective from reasoning over the mean to reasoning over the tail, thereby building a statistically-grounded buffer against worst-case outcomes.<n>We show this reliability comes at the rational and quantifiable cost of slightly reduced energy savings to 17%, exposing the false economy of the biased approach.
• Score: 25.00990717105066
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: A critical barrier to the trustworthiness of sixth-generation (6G) agentic autonomous networks is the uncertainty neglect bias; a cognitive tendency for large language model (LLM)-powered agents to make high-stakes decisions based on simple averages while ignoring the tail risk of extreme events. This paper proposes an unbiased, risk-aware framework for agentic negotiation, designed to ensure robust resource allocation in 6G network slicing. Specifically, agents leverage Digital Twins (DTs) to predict full latency distributions, which are then evaluated using a formal framework from extreme value theory, namely, Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR). This approach fundamentally shifts the agent's objective from reasoning over the mean to reasoning over the tail, thereby building a statistically-grounded buffer against worst-case outcomes. Furthermore, our framework ensures full uncertainty awareness by requiring agents to quantify epistemic uncertainty -- confidence in their own DTs predictions -- and propagate this meta-verification to make robust decisions, preventing them from acting on unreliable data. We validate this framework in a 6G inter-slice negotiation use-case between an eMBB and a URLLC agent. The results demonstrate the profound failure of the biased, mean-based baseline, which consistently fails its SLAs with a 25\% rate. Our unbiased, CVaR-aware agent successfully mitigates this bias, eliminating SLA violations and reducing the URLLC and eMBB p99.999 latencies by around 11\%. We show this reliability comes at the rational and quantifiable cost of slightly reduced energy savings to 17\%, exposing the false economy of the biased approach. This work provides a concrete methodology for building the trustworthy autonomous systems required for 6G.

Related papers

• ODAR: Principled Adaptive Routing for LLM Reasoning via Active Inference [60.958331943869126]
  ODAR-Expert is an adaptive routing framework that optimize the accuracy-efficiency trade-off via principled resource allocation.<n>We show strong and consistent gains, including 98.2% accuracy on MATH and 54.8% on Humanity's Last Exam.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T05:22:01Z)
• RFEval: Benchmarking Reasoning Faithfulness under Counterfactual Reasoning Intervention in Large Reasoning Models [5.733004743054914]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) exhibit strong performance, yet often produce rationales that sound plausible but fail to reflect their true decision process.<n>We introduce a formal framework for reasoning faithfulness, defined by two testable conditions.<n>We present RFEval, a benchmark of 7,186 instances that probes faithfulness via controlled, output-level counterfactual interventions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-19T03:49:37Z)
• Information Fidelity in Tool-Using LLM Agents: A Martingale Analysis of the Model Context Protocol [69.11739400975445]
  We introduce the first theoretical framework for analyzing error accumulation in Model Context Protocol (MCP) agents.<n>We show that cumulative distortion exhibits linear growth and high-probability deviations bounded by $O(sqrtT)$.<n>Key findings include: semantic weighting reduces distortion by 80%, and periodic re-grounding approximately every 9 steps suffices for error control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-10T21:08:53Z)
• Conformal Thinking: Risk Control for Reasoning on a Compute Budget [60.65072883773352]
  Reasoning Large Language Models (LLMs) enable test-time scaling, with dataset-level accuracy improving as the token budget increases.<n>We re-frame the budget setting problem as risk control, limiting the error rate while minimizing compute.<n>Our framework introduces an upper threshold that stops reasoning when the model is confident and a novel lower threshold that preemptively stops unsolvable instances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T18:17:22Z)
• Mitigating Safety Tax via Distribution-Grounded Refinement in Large Reasoning Models [63.368505631152594]
  Safety alignment incurs safety tax that perturbs a large reasoning model's (LRM) general reasoning ability.<n>Existing datasets used for safety alignment for an LRM are usually constructed by distilling safety reasoning traces and answers from an external LRM or human labeler.<n>We propose a safety alignment dataset construction method, dubbed DGR. DGR transforms and refines an existing out-of-distributional safety reasoning dataset to be aligned with the target's LLM inner distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T14:18:48Z)
• The Silent Scholar Problem: A Probabilistic Framework for Breaking Epistemic Asymmetry in LLM Agents [0.6117371161379209]
  We propose a formal probabilistic framework that provides agents with a non-altruistic motive for bidirectional knowledge exchange.<n>We show how these accumulated belief states serve as verifiable reward signals for Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) and high-quality data filters for Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT)<n> Simulation results validate that this uncertainty-driven strategy significantly outperforms random baselines in heterogeneous environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-24T02:02:25Z)
• Confidence-Based Response Abstinence: Improving LLM Trustworthiness via Activation-Based Uncertainty Estimation [7.3923284353934875]
  We propose a method for confidence estimation in retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems that aligns closely with the correctness of large language model (LLM) outputs.<n>Our approach extends prior uncertainty quantification methods by leveraging raw feed-forward network (FFN) activations as auto-regressive signals.<n>Our results demonstrate that activation-based confidence modeling offers a scalable, architecture-aware path toward trustworthy RAG deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-15T16:55:56Z)
• Toward an Unbiased Collective Memory for Efficient LLM-Based Agentic 6G Cross-Domain Management [1.9188126920097714]
  This paper introduces a novel framework for proactive cross-domain resource orchestration in 6G RAN-Edge networks.<n>The system comprises specialized RAN (energy efficiency) and Edge (latency assurance) agents that engage in iterative negotiation.<n>Agents interact with a digital twin to test their proposals and leverage a long-term collective memory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-30T12:57:11Z)
• Certainty-Guided Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Dynamic Thinking Budget Approach [0.15749416770494704]
  We show that Certainty-Guided Reasoning (CGR) improves baseline accuracy while reducing token usage.<n>CGR can eliminate millions of tokens in aggregate, with tunable trade-offs between certainty thresholds and efficiency.<n>By integrating confidence into the reasoning process, CGR makes large reasoning language models more adaptive, trustworthy, and resource efficient.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-09T14:57:15Z)
• A Bayesian Incentive Mechanism for Poison-Resilient Federated Learning [0.0]
  Federated learning (FL) enables collaborative model training across decentralized clients while preserving data privacy.<n>This paper introduces a proactive, economic defense: a lightweight Bayesian incentive mechanism that makes malicious behavior economically irrational.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-16T17:27:25Z)
• Confidential Guardian: Cryptographically Prohibiting the Abuse of Model Abstention [65.47632669243657]
  A dishonest institution can exploit mechanisms to discriminate or unjustly deny services under the guise of uncertainty.<n>We demonstrate the practicality of this threat by introducing an uncertainty-inducing attack called Mirage.<n>We propose Confidential Guardian, a framework that analyzes calibration metrics on a reference dataset to detect artificially suppressed confidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T19:47:50Z)
• Criticality and Safety Margins for Reinforcement Learning [53.10194953873209]
  We seek to define a criticality framework with both a quantifiable ground truth and a clear significance to users.<n>We introduce true criticality as the expected drop in reward when an agent deviates from its policy for n consecutive random actions.<n>We also introduce the concept of proxy criticality, a low-overhead metric that has a statistically monotonic relationship to true criticality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-26T21:00:45Z)
• Free Lunch for Generating Effective Outlier Supervision [46.37464572099351]
  We propose an ultra-effective method to generate near-realistic outlier supervision. Our proposed textttBayesAug significantly reduces the false positive rate over 12.50% compared with the previous schemes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-17T01:46:45Z)
• Learning Calibrated Uncertainties for Domain Shift: A Distributionally Robust Learning Approach [150.8920602230832]
  We propose a framework for learning calibrated uncertainties under domain shifts. In particular, the density ratio estimation reflects the closeness of a target (test) sample to the source (training) distribution. We show that our proposed method generates calibrated uncertainties that benefit downstream tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-08T02:10:54Z)

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.