Learning to Trust Experience: A Monitor-Trust-Regulator Framework for Learning under Unobservable Feedback Reliability
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.09261v2
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 00:48:31 GMT
- Title: Learning to Trust Experience: A Monitor-Trust-Regulator Framework for Learning under Unobservable Feedback Reliability
- Abstract summary: We study Epistemic Identifiability under Unobservable Reliability (EIUR)<n>Standard robust learning can converge stably yet form high-confidence, systematically wrong beliefs.<n>We propose metacognitive regulation as a practical response: a second, introspective control loop that infers experience credibility from endogenous evidence in the learner's internal dynamics.
- Score: 24.97566911521709
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Learning under unobservable feedback reliability poses a distinct challenge beyond optimization robustness: a system must decide whether to learn from an experience, not only how to learn stably. We study this setting as Epistemic Identifiability under Unobservable Reliability (EIUR), where each experience has a latent credibility, reliable and unreliable feedback can be locally indistinguishable, and data are generated in a closed loop by the learner's own evolving beliefs and actions. In EIUR, standard robust learning can converge stably yet form high-confidence, systematically wrong beliefs. We propose metacognitive regulation as a practical response: a second, introspective control loop that infers experience credibility from endogenous evidence in the learner's internal dynamics. We formalize this as a modular Monitor-Trust-Regulator (MTR) decomposition and instantiate it with self-diagnosis, which maintains a slowly varying experience-trust variable that softly modulates learning updates, without exogenous reliability labels or an explicit corruption model. Empirically, in the EIUR regimes studied here, self-diagnosis is associated with improved epistemic identifiability. In reinforcement learning, it enables calibrated skepticism and recovery under systematically corrupted rewards. In supervised learning, it exposes a critical dissociation: performance recovery does not imply epistemic recovery. Accuracy can rebound while internal belief dynamics remain locked-in by early misleading data, a failure detectable only through introspective diagnostics. Together, MTR and self-diagnosis provide an organizing abstraction and a concrete design template for intrinsic reliability assessment in autonomous learning under unobservable reliability.
Related papers
- Adaptive Modality Reliability Diagnosis and Restoration for Robust Multimodal Intent Recognition [2.2012643583422347]
Multimodal intent recognition combines linguistic, acoustic, and visual evidence, but individual modalities may be noisy, missing, semantically conflicting, or disproportionately dominant.<n>We propose PRIME, a closed-loop reliability guided framework that jointly diagnoses, restores, and reassesses modality quality at the sample level.<n> Experiments on multimodal intent-recognition benchmarks show that PRIME maintains competitive clean-data performance while improving under missing, noisy, conflicting, and modality-imbalanced conditions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-04T11:14:13Z) - Reinforcement Learning with Metacognitive Feedback Elicits Faithful Uncertainty Expression in LLMs [60.80435138270317]
We apply reinforcement learning with metacognitive feedback to the problem of faithful calibration.<n>Experiments show RLMF achieves generalizable, state-of-the-art FC on diverse tasks.<n> RLMF surpasses standard RL by up to 63% while enhancing models' ability to assess and express their own capability limits.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-30T17:56:01Z) - Process Supervision of Confidence Margin for Calibrated LLM Reasoning [52.373121066425455]
Scaling test-time computation with reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as a reliable path to improve large language models (LLM) reasoning ability.<n>Yet, outcome-based reward often incentivizes models to be overconfident, leading to hallucinations, unreliable confidence-based control, and unnecessary compute allocation.<n>We introduce Reinforcement Learning with Confidence Margin (textbfRLCM), a calibration-aware RL framework that jointly optimize correctness and confidence reliability.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-25T14:40:13Z) - The Illusion of Certainty: Decoupling Capability and Calibration in On-Policy Distillation [67.26315138466312]
We propose a calibration-aware OPD framework, CaOPD, that estimates empirical confidence from model rollouts.<n>Our findings highlight that capability distillation does not imply confidence, and that confidence should be treated as an essential objective in post-training.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-18T04:43:40Z) - Towards Trustworthy Depression Estimation via Disentangled Evidential Learning [50.22167852149165]
We propose EviDep, an evidential learning framework that jointly quantifies depression severity.<n>EviDep enforces strict information integrity to guarantee robust evidence synthesis.<n>It achieves state-of-the-art predictive accuracy and superior uncertainty calibration, delivering a robust fail-safe mechanism for trustworthy clinical screening.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-17T13:27:11Z) - Learning Can Converge Stably to the Wrong Belief under Latent Reliability [24.97566911521709]
We show that learning algorithms converge stably to incorrect solutions when feedback reliability is unobservable.<n>We propose a Monitor-Trust-Regulator framework that infers reliability from learning dynamics and modulates updates through a slow-timescale trust variable.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-23T02:28:07Z) - VI-CuRL: Stabilizing Verifier-Independent RL Reasoning via Confidence-Guided Variance Reduction [55.04308051033549]
Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has emerged as a dominant paradigm for enhancing Large Language Models (LLMs) reasoning.<n>We introduceVerifier-Independent Curriculum Reinforcement Learning (VI-CuRL), a framework that leverages the model's intrinsic confidence to construct a curriculum independent from external verifiers.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-13T03:40:52Z) - Epistemic Context Learning: Building Trust the Right Way in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems [94.9141394384021]
Individual agents in multi-agent systems often lack robustness, tending to blindly conform to misleading peers.<n>We show this weakness stems from both sycophancy and inadequate ability to evaluate peer reliability.<n>We first formalize the learning problem of history-aware reference, introducing the historical interactions of peers as additional input.<n>We then develop Epistemic Context Learning (ECL), a reasoning framework that conditions predictions on explicitly-built peer profiles from history.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-29T13:59:32Z) - Meta-Cognitive Reinforcement Learning with Self-Doubt and Recovery [25.522943543082363]
We propose a meta-cognitive reinforcement learning framework that enables an agent to assess, regulate, and recover its learning behavior.<n>The proposed method introduces a meta-trust variable driven by Value Prediction Error Stability (VPES), which modulates learning dynamics via fail-safe regulation and gradual trust recovery.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-28T02:43:03Z) - Illusions of Confidence? Diagnosing LLM Truthfulness via Neighborhood Consistency [78.91846841708586]
We show that even facts answered with perfect self-consistency can rapidly collapse under mild contextual interference.<n>We propose Neighbor-Consistency Belief (NCB), a structural measure of belief that evaluates response coherence across a conceptual neighborhood.<n>We also present Structure-Aware Training (SAT), which optimize context-invariant belief structure and reduces long-tail knowledge brittleness by approximately 30%.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-09T16:23:21Z) - Parent-Guided Adaptive Reliability (PGAR): A Behavioural Meta-Learning Framework for Stable and Trustworthy AI [0.0]
Parent-Guided Adaptive Reliability (PGAR) is a lightweight behavioural meta-learning framework.<n>It adds a supervisory "parent" layer on top of a standard learner to improve stability, calibration, and recovery under disturbances.<n>PGAR functions as a plug-in reliability layer for existing optimization and learning pipelines, supporting interpretable traces in safety-relevant settings.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-07T06:02:34Z) - Aurora: Are Android Malware Classifiers Reliable and Stable under Distribution Shift? [51.12297424766236]
AURORA is a framework to evaluate malware classifiers based on their confidence quality and operational resilience.<n>AURORA is complemented by a set of metrics designed to go beyond point-in-time performance.<n>The fragility in SOTA frameworks across datasets of varying drift suggests the need for a return to the whiteboard.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-28T20:22:43Z) - TrustLoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation for Failure Detection under Out-of-distribution Data [62.22804234013273]
We propose a simple failure detection framework to unify and facilitate classification with rejection under both covariate and semantic shifts.<n>Our key insight is that by separating and consolidating failure-specific reliability knowledge with low-rank adapters, we can enhance the failure detection ability effectively and flexibly.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-20T09:20:55Z) - CARIL: Confidence-Aware Regression in Imitation Learning for Autonomous Driving [0.0]
End-to-end vision-based imitation learning has demonstrated promising results in autonomous driving.<n>Traditional approaches rely on either regressionbased models, which provide precise control but lack confidence estimation, or classification-based models, which offer confidence scores but suffer from reduced precision due to discretization.<n>We introduce a dual-head neural network architecture that integrates both regression and classification heads to improve decision reliability in imitation learning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-02T08:19:02Z) - Selective Learning: Towards Robust Calibration with Dynamic Regularization [79.92633587914659]
Miscalibration in deep learning refers to there is a discrepancy between the predicted confidence and performance.
We introduce Dynamic Regularization (DReg) which aims to learn what should be learned during training thereby circumventing the confidence adjusting trade-off.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-13T11:25:20Z) - Trust, but Verify: Using Self-Supervised Probing to Improve
Trustworthiness [29.320691367586004]
We introduce a new approach of self-supervised probing, which enables us to check and mitigate the overconfidence issue for a trained model.
We provide a simple yet effective framework, which can be flexibly applied to existing trustworthiness-related methods in a plug-and-play manner.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-06T08:57:20Z)
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.