Adaptive Trust Metrics for Multi-LLM Systems: Enhancing Reliability in Regulated Industries

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.08858v1
• Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2026 01:50:10 GMT
• Title: Adaptive Trust Metrics for Multi-LLM Systems: Enhancing Reliability in Regulated Industries
• Authors: Tejaswini Bollikonda,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in sensitive domains such as healthcare, finance, and law.<n>This paper explores adaptive trust metrics for multi LLM ecosystems.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in sensitive domains such as healthcare, finance, and law, yet their integration raises pressing concerns around trust, accountability, and reliability. This paper explores adaptive trust metrics for multi LLM ecosystems, proposing a framework for quantifying and improving model reliability under regulated constraints. By analyzing system behaviors, evaluating uncertainty across multiple LLMs, and implementing dynamic monitoring pipelines, the study demonstrates practical pathways for operational trustworthiness. Case studies from financial compliance and healthcare diagnostics illustrate the applicability of adaptive trust metrics in real world settings. The findings position adaptive trust measurement as a foundational enabler for safe and scalable AI adoption in regulated industries.

Related papers

• Diagnosing the Reliability of LLM-as-a-Judge via Item Response Theory [6.880198682732575]
  We introduce a two-phase diagnostic framework for assessing reliability of LLM-as-a-Judge, grounded in Item Response Theory (IRT)<n>The framework adopts Graded Response Model (GRM) of IRT and formalizes reliability along two complementary dimensions: (1) intrinsic consistency, defined as the stability of measurement behavior under prompt variations, and (2) human alignment, capturing correspondence with human quality assessments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-31T05:24:08Z)
• Calibration Is Not Enough: Evaluating Confidence Estimation Under Language Variations [49.84786015324238]
  Confidence estimation (CE) indicates how reliable the answers of large language models (LLMs) are, and can impact user trust and decision-making.<n>We present a comprehensive evaluation framework for CE that measures their confidence quality on three new aspects.<n>These include robustness of confidence against prompt perturbations, stability across semantic equivalent answers, and sensitivity to semantically different answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-12T23:16:50Z)
• Towards Comprehensive Stage-wise Benchmarking of Large Language Models in Fact-Checking [64.97768177044355]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world fact-checking systems.<n>We present FactArena, a fully automated arena-style evaluation framework.<n>Our analyses reveal significant discrepancies between static claim-verification accuracy and end-to-end fact-checking competence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-06T02:51:56Z)
• Overconfidence in LLM-as-a-Judge: Diagnosis and Confidence-Driven Solution [20.607071807794195]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely used as automated judges, where practical value depends on both accuracy and trustworthy, risk-aware judgments.<n>Existing approaches predominantly focus on accuracy, overlooking the necessity of well-calibrated confidence.<n>We advocate a shift from accuracy-centric evaluation to confidence-driven, risk-aware LLM-as-a-Judge systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-08T11:11:22Z)
• Beyond Benchmarks: Dynamic, Automatic And Systematic Red-Teaming Agents For Trustworthy Medical Language Models [87.66870367661342]
  Large language models (LLMs) are used in AI applications in healthcare.<n>Red-teaming framework that continuously stress-test LLMs can reveal significant weaknesses in four safety-critical domains.<n>A suite of adversarial agents is applied to autonomously mutate test cases, identify/evolve unsafe-triggering strategies, and evaluate responses.<n>Our framework delivers an evolvable, scalable, and reliable safeguard for the next generation of medical AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-30T08:44:22Z)
• A Weighted Byzantine Fault Tolerance Consensus Driven Trusted Multiple Large Language Models Network [53.37983409425452]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success across a wide range of applications.<n>Recently, collaborative frameworks such as the Multi-LLM Network (MultiLLMN) have been introduced.<n>We propose a novel Trusted MultiLLMN framework driven by a weighted Byzantine Fault Tolerance (WBFT) blockchain consensus mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-08T10:04:41Z)
• FedMM-X: A Trustworthy and Interpretable Framework for Federated Multi-Modal Learning in Dynamic Environments [0.0]
  We propose a framework that unifies federated learning with explainable multi-modal reasoning to ensure trustworthiness in decentralized, dynamic settings.<n>Our approach, called FedMM-X, leverages cross-modal consistency checks, client-level interpretability mechanisms, and dynamic trust calibration.<n>Our findings pave the way toward developing robust, interpretable, and socially responsible AI systems in Real-world environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-25T11:28:21Z)
• SteerConf: Steering LLMs for Confidence Elicitation [11.872504642312705]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit impressive performance across diverse domains but often suffer from overconfidence.<n>We propose SteerConf, a novel framework that systematically steers LLMs' confidence scores to improve their calibration and reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-04T18:40:49Z)
• Causality Is Key to Understand and Balance Multiple Goals in Trustworthy ML and Foundation Models [91.24296813969003]
  This paper advocates integrating causal methods into machine learning to navigate the trade-offs among key principles of trustworthy ML.<n>We argue that a causal approach is essential for balancing multiple competing objectives in both trustworthy ML and foundation models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-28T14:57:33Z)
• A Comprehensive Survey on the Trustworthiness of Large Language Models in Healthcare [8.378348088931578]
  The application of large language models (LLMs) in healthcare holds significant promise for enhancing clinical decision-making, medical research, and patient care.<n>Their integration into real-world clinical settings raises critical concerns around trustworthiness, particularly around dimensions of truthfulness, privacy, safety, robustness, fairness, and explainability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T18:43:06Z)
• On the Trustworthiness of Generative Foundation Models: Guideline, Assessment, and Perspective [377.2483044466149]
  Generative Foundation Models (GenFMs) have emerged as transformative tools.<n>Their widespread adoption raises critical concerns regarding trustworthiness across dimensions.<n>This paper presents a comprehensive framework to address these challenges through three key contributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T06:20:36Z)

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.