Agentic Uncertainty Quantification

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.15703v1
• Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2026 07:16:26 GMT
• Title: Agentic Uncertainty Quantification
• Abstract summary: We propose a unified Dual-Process Agentic UQ (AUQ) framework that transforms verbalized uncertainty into active, bi-directional control signals.<n>Our architecture comprises two complementary mechanisms: System 1 (Uncertainty-Aware Memory, UAM), which implicitly propagates verbalized confidence and semantic explanations to prevent blind decision-making; and System 2 (Uncertainty-Aware Reflection, UAR), which utilizes these explanations as rational cues to trigger targeted inference-time resolution only when necessary.
• Score: 76.94013626702183
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Although AI agents have demonstrated impressive capabilities in long-horizon reasoning, their reliability is severely hampered by the ``Spiral of Hallucination,'' where early epistemic errors propagate irreversibly. Existing methods face a dilemma: uncertainty quantification (UQ) methods typically act as passive sensors, only diagnosing risks without addressing them, while self-reflection mechanisms suffer from continuous or aimless corrections. To bridge this gap, we propose a unified Dual-Process Agentic UQ (AUQ) framework that transforms verbalized uncertainty into active, bi-directional control signals. Our architecture comprises two complementary mechanisms: System 1 (Uncertainty-Aware Memory, UAM), which implicitly propagates verbalized confidence and semantic explanations to prevent blind decision-making; and System 2 (Uncertainty-Aware Reflection, UAR), which utilizes these explanations as rational cues to trigger targeted inference-time resolution only when necessary. This enables the agent to balance efficient execution and deep deliberation dynamically. Extensive experiments on closed-loop benchmarks and open-ended deep research tasks demonstrate that our training-free approach achieves superior performance and trajectory-level calibration. We believe this principled framework AUQ represents a significant step towards reliable agents.

Related papers

• Is Your Model Thinking or Just Stagnating? PUMA: Diagnosing Reasoning Pathology via Phase-Momentum Alignment [13.9489759632504]
  Test-time scaling empowers Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) to tackle complex tasks via extensive Chain-of-Thought (CoT)<n>This paper introduces PUMA, a training-free framework employing a tiered diagnostic architecture.<n>Experiments on LRMs spanning 1.5B to 32B demonstrate that PUMA consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines across diverse benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-19T11:00:59Z)
• Exploring Agentic Tool-Calling Decisions via Uncertainty-Aligned Reinforcement Learning [63.24624171679711]
  Large language model (LLM)-based agents often make suboptimal tool-use decisions.<n>We propose TRUST, which incorporates uncertainty quantification into reward design as a repulsive force for maintaining uncertainty separation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-05T07:08:34Z)
• Proactive for Uncertainty: Cause-Aware Error Diagnosis and Interactive Clarification for Spoken Dialogue Systems [40.265250435329456]
  We propose a cause-aware error recovery paradigm that fundamentally rethinks robustness in SDS.<n>Unlike traditional confidence filtering, we introduce a suite of small precision-focused detectors.<n>This fine-grained diagnostic intelligence empowers the LLM to orchestrate targeted, multi-turn clarification strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-25T03:57:38Z)
• Quantifiable Uncertainty: A Stochastic Consensus Multi-Agent RAG Framework for Robust Malware Detection [1.2183405753834562]
  We present MAGMA, a framework that decouples malware analysis into semantic code retrieval and probabilistic verification.<n>We show that MAGMA achieves a 98.4% detection rate, substantially exceeding existing solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-08T18:46:24Z)
• 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)
• Know What You Know: Metacognitive Entropy Calibration for Verifiable RL Reasoning [31.629261193485053]
  Large reasoning models (LRMs) have emerged as a powerful paradigm for solving complex real-world tasks.<n>Most existing outcome-only RLVR pipelines rely almost exclusively on a binary correctness signal and largely ignore the model's intrinsic uncertainty.<n>We propose EGPO, a metacognitive entropy calibration framework that explicitly integrates intrinsic uncertainty into RLVR for enhancing LRMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-26T08:40:06Z)
• Uncertainty-aware Generative Recommendation [52.0751022792023]
  Uncertainty-aware Generative Recommendation (UGR) is a unified framework that leverages uncertainty as a critical signal for adaptive optimization.<n>UGR not only yields superior recommendation performance but also fundamentally stabilizes training, preventing the performance degradation often observed in standard methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-12T08:48:51Z)
• The Value of Variance: Mitigating Debate Collapse in Multi-Agent Systems via Uncertainty-Driven Policy Optimization [11.251743031610646]
  Multi-agent debate (MAD) systems improve reasoning through iterative deliberation, but remain vulnerable to debate collapse.<n>Existing methods lack principled mechanisms to detect or prevent such failures.<n>We propose a hierarchical metric that quantifies behavioral uncertainty at three levels: intra-agent (individual reasoning uncertainty), inter-agent (interactive uncertainty), and system-level (output uncertainty)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-06T20:41:49Z)
• Self-Guard: Defending Large Reasoning Models via enhanced self-reflection [54.775612141528164]
  Self-Guard is a lightweight safety defense framework for Large Reasoning Models.<n>It bridges the awareness-compliance gap, achieving robust safety performance without compromising model utility.<n>Self-Guard exhibits strong generalization across diverse unseen risks and varying model scales.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-31T13:06:11Z)
• BAPO: Boundary-Aware Policy Optimization for Reliable Agentic Search [72.87861928940929]
  Boundary-Aware Policy Optimization (BAPO) is a novel RL framework designed to cultivate reliable boundary awareness without compromising accuracy.<n>BAPO introduces two key components: (i) a group-based boundary-aware reward that encourages an IDK response only when the reasoning reaches its limit, and (ii) an adaptive reward modulator that strategically suspends this reward during early exploration, preventing the model from exploiting IDK as a shortcut.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-16T07:06:58Z)
• 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)
• Thinking, Faithful and Stable: Mitigating Hallucinations in LLMs [0.4115305983711515]
  This project develops a self correcting framework for large language models (LLMs)<n>Rather than relying solely on final answer correctness, our approach leverages fine grained uncertainty signals.<n>We design a composite reward function that penalizes unjustified high confidence and entropy spikes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-19T23:09:26Z)
• Towards Adversarial Robustness and Uncertainty Quantification in DINOv2-based Few-Shot Anomaly Detection [6.288045889067255]
  Foundation models such as DINOv2 have shown strong performance in few-shot anomaly detection.<n>We present one of the first systematic studies of adversarial attacks and uncertainty estimation in this setting.<n>We find that raw anomaly scores are poorly calibrated, revealing a gap between confidence and correctness that limits safety-critical use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-15T15:06:45Z)
• Sycophancy Mitigation Through Reinforcement Learning with Uncertainty-Aware Adaptive Reasoning Trajectories [58.988535279557546]
  We introduce textbf sycophancy Mitigation through Adaptive Reasoning Trajectories.<n>We show that SMART significantly reduces sycophantic behavior while preserving strong performance on out-of-distribution inputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-20T17:09:14Z)
• Uncertainty-Aware Attention Heads: Efficient Unsupervised Uncertainty Quantification for LLMs [129.79394562739705]
  Large language models (LLMs) exhibit impressive fluency, but often produce critical errors known as "hallucinations"<n>We propose RAUQ (Recurrent Attention-based Uncertainty Quantification), an unsupervised approach that leverages intrinsic attention patterns in transformers to detect hallucinations efficiently.<n> Experiments across 4 LLMs and 12 question answering, summarization, and translation tasks demonstrate that RAUQ yields excellent results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-26T14:28:37Z)
• Know Where You're Uncertain When Planning with Multimodal Foundation Models: A Formal Framework [54.40508478482667]
  We present a comprehensive framework to disentangle, quantify, and mitigate uncertainty in perception and plan generation.<n>We propose methods tailored to the unique properties of perception and decision-making.<n>We show that our uncertainty disentanglement framework reduces variability by up to 40% and enhances task success rates by 5% compared to baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-03T17:32:00Z)
• Predicting Safety Misbehaviours in Autonomous Driving Systems using Uncertainty Quantification [8.213390074932132]
  This paper evaluates different uncertainty quantification methods from the deep learning domain for the anticipatory testing of safety-critical misbehaviours.<n>We compute uncertainty scores as the vehicle executes, following the intuition that high uncertainty scores are indicative of unsupported runtime conditions.<n>In our study, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness and computational overhead associated with two uncertainty quantification methods, namely MC- Dropout and Deep Ensembles, for misbehaviour avoidance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-29T10:28:28Z)

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.