Designing Service Systems from Textual Evidence

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.10400v1
• Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2026 04:34:46 GMT
• Title: Designing Service Systems from Textual Evidence
• Abstract summary: We study how to identify the best service configuration with high confidence while minimizing expensive human audits.<n>We develop an estimator combining proxy scores with inverse-propensity-weighted residuals and construct anytime-valid confidence sequences.
• Score: 18.85883540190321
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Designing service systems requires selecting among alternative configurations -- choosing the best chatbot variant, the optimal routing policy, or the most effective quality control procedure. In many service systems, the primary evidence of performance quality is textual -- customer support transcripts, complaint narratives, compliance review reports -- rather than the scalar measurements assumed by classical optimization methods. Large language models (LLMs) can read such textual evidence and produce standardized quality scores, but these automated judges exhibit systematic biases that vary across alternatives and evaluation instances. Human expert review remains accurate but costly. We study how to identify the best service configuration with high confidence while minimizing expensive human audits, given that automated evaluation is cheap but biased. We formalize this as a sequential decision problem where a biased proxy score is observed for every evaluation, and a verified outcome can be acquired selectively at additional cost. We prove that LLM-only selection fails under arm-dependent bias, and that naive selective-audit estimators can be asymptotically biased. We develop an estimator combining proxy scores with inverse-propensity-weighted residuals and construct anytime-valid confidence sequences. Our algorithm, PP-LUCB, jointly decides which alternatives to evaluate and whether to request human audits, concentrating reviews where the LLM judge is least reliable. We prove correctness and establish instance-dependent cost bounds showing near-optimal efficiency. On a customer support ticket classification task, our algorithm correctly identifies the best model in 40/40 trials while achieving 90\% audit cost reduction.

Related papers

• Quantifying and Auditing LLM Evaluation via Positive--Unlabeled Learning [4.114698130306098]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used as judges for scalable evaluation.<n>LLMs exhibit systematic biases that are decoupled from semantic quality.<n>Human supervision is costly and typically selective, yielding reliable positive judgments but leaving most outputs unlabelled and potentially mixed in quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-17T13:26:04Z)
• Time to REFLECT: Can We Trust LLM Judges for Evidence-based Research Agents? [61.49434544687523]
  We introduce REFLECT, a meta-evaluation benchmark targeting fine-grained failure detection in agentic environments.<n> REFLECT defines a detailed taxonomy of process- and outcome-level failure modes, instantiated by performing controlled and localized interventions.<n>Our experiments show that even the best-performing models achieve overall accuracies below 55% across reasoning, tool-use, and report-quality failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-18T23:55:08Z)
• Robust Checkpoint Selection for Multimodal LLMs via Agentic Evaluation and Stability-Aware Ranking [0.4562811934651716]
  We formulate checkpoint selection as a robust decision problem under evaluation uncertainty.<n>We propose a multi-stage framework that integrates curated real-world data, structured LLM-based judgment, and multi-stage ranking protocols.<n>We demonstrate that data quality, specifically OCR readability, is a critical determinant of evaluation validity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T12:18:32Z)
• Verified Critical Step Optimization for LLM Agents [67.05296684575445]
  Critical Step Optimization focuses preference learning on verified critical steps.<n>Method starts from failed policy trajectories rather than expert demonstrations.<n>Experiments on GAIA-Text-103 and XBench-DeepSearch show that CSO achieves 37% and 26% relative improvement over the SFT baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T11:41:02Z)
• Best Arm Identification with LLM Judges and Limited Human [18.85883540190321]
  We study fixed-confidence best-arm identification (BAI) where a cheap but potentially biased proxy is available for every sample.<n>We develop an estimator for the mean of each arm that combines proxy scores with inverse-propensity-weighted residuals.<n>Based on the estimator and confidence sequence, we propose an algorithm that adaptively selects and audits arms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-29T09:50:34Z)
• Reliable LLM-Based Edge-Cloud-Expert Cascades for Telecom Knowledge Systems [54.916243942641444]
  Large language models (LLMs) are emerging as key enablers of automation in domains such as telecommunications.<n>We study an edge-cloud-expert cascaded LLM-based knowledge system that supports decision-making through a question-and-answer pipeline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-23T03:10:09Z)
• Benchmarking Contextual Understanding for In-Car Conversational Systems [0.9437812993238097]
  In-Car Conversational Question Answering (ConvQA) systems significantly enhance user experience by enabling seamless voice interactions.<n>This paper explores the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) alongside advanced prompting techniques and agent-based methods to evaluate the extent to which ConvQA system responses adhere to user utterances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-12T21:15:49Z)
• Prompt Optimization via Retrieved Reasoning Assets and Multi-Agent Analysis [5.935239028627343]
  We introduce MA-SAPO, a Multi-Agent framework for Score-Aware Prompt Optimization.<n>Compared to prior methods, MA-SAPO explicitly couples evaluation outcomes with structured reasoning to guide systematic edits.<n>By turning evaluation signals into interpretable reasoning chains, MA-SAPO produces prompt refinements that are more transparent, auditable, and controllable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-18T20:21:09Z)
• Meta-Router: Bridging Gold-standard and Preference-based Evaluations in Large Language Model Routing [15.724480880994259]
  A large language model (LLM) router selects the most appropriate model from a pool of candidates for each query.<n> preference-based data, collected via crowdsourcing or LLM-as-a-judge systems, are cheaper and more scalable, yet often biased in reflecting the true quality of responses.<n>We develop an integrative causal router training framework that corrects preference-data bias, address imbalances between two data sources, and improve routing robustness and efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-29T21:44:00Z)
• Reference-Free Rating of LLM Responses via Latent Information [53.463883683503106]
  We study the common practice of asking a judge model to assign Likert-scale scores to free-text responses.<n>We then propose and evaluate Latent Judges, which derive scalar ratings from internal model signals.<n>Across a broad suite of pairwise and single-rating benchmarks, latent methods match or surpass standard prompting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-29T12:15:52Z)
• Pairwise or Pointwise? Evaluating Feedback Protocols for Bias in LLM-Based Evaluation [57.380464382910375]
  We show that the choice of feedback protocol for evaluation can significantly affect evaluation reliability and induce systematic biases.<n>We find that generator models can flip preferences by embedding distractor features.<n>We offer recommendations for choosing feedback protocols based on dataset characteristics and evaluation objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-20T19:05:59Z)
• DAFE: LLM-Based Evaluation Through Dynamic Arbitration for Free-Form Question-Answering [12.879551933541345]
  We propose the Dynamic Arbitration Framework for Evaluation (DAFE) to evaluate large language models.<n>DAFE employs two primary LLM-as-judges and engages a third arbitrator only in cases of disagreements.<n>We show DAFE's ability to provide consistent, scalable, and resource-efficient assessments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-11T15:29:55Z)
• Optimal Baseline Corrections for Off-Policy Contextual Bandits [61.740094604552475]
  We aim to learn decision policies that optimize an unbiased offline estimate of an online reward metric. We propose a single framework built on their equivalence in learning scenarios. Our framework enables us to characterize the variance-optimal unbiased estimator and provide a closed-form solution for it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-09T12:52:22Z)

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.