Real-Time Trustworthiness Scoring for LLM Structured Outputs and Data Extraction

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.18014v1
• Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2026 09:17:57 GMT
• Title: Real-Time Trustworthiness Scoring for LLM Structured Outputs and Data Extraction
• Abstract summary: We present a method to score the trustworthiness of Structured Outputs in real-time, such that lower-scoring outputs are more likely to contain errors.<n>We additionally present one of the first public benchmarks with reliable ground-truth values that are not full of mistakes.
• Score: 4.66261113599649
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Structured Outputs from current LLMs exhibit sporadic errors, hindering enterprise AI efforts from realizing their immense potential. We present CONSTRUCT, a method to score the trustworthiness of LLM Structured Outputs in real-time, such that lower-scoring outputs are more likely to contain errors. This reveals the best places to focus limited human review bandwidth. CONSTRUCT additionally scores the trustworthiness of each field within a LLM Structured Output, helping reviewers quickly identify which parts of the output are wrong. Our method is suitable for any LLM (including black-box LLM APIs without logprobs such as reasoning models and Anthropic models), does not require labeled training data nor custom model deployment, and works for complex Structured Outputs with many fields of diverse types (including nested JSON schemas). We additionally present one of the first public LLM Structured Output benchmarks with reliable ground-truth values that are not full of mistakes. Over this four-dataset benchmark, CONSTRUCT detects errors from various LLMs (including Gemini 3 and GPT-5) with significantly higher precision/recall than other scoring methods.

Related papers

• Beyond Isolated Dots: Benchmarking Structured Table Construction as Deep Knowledge Extraction [80.88654868264645]
  Arranged and Organized Extraction Benchmark designed to evaluate ability of large language models to comprehend fragmented documents.<n>AOE includes 11 carefully crafted tasks across three diverse domains, requiring models to generate context-specific schema tailored to varied input queries.<n>Results show that even the most advanced models struggled significantly.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-22T06:37:51Z)
• Latent Factor Models Meets Instructions: Goal-conditioned Latent Factor Discovery without Task Supervision [50.45597801390757]
  Instruct-LF is a goal-oriented latent factor discovery system.<n>It integrates instruction-following ability with statistical models to handle noisy datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T02:03:08Z)
• A Real-World Benchmark for Evaluating Fine-Grained Issue Solving Capabilities of Large Language Models [11.087034068992653]
  FAUN-Eval is a benchmark specifically designed to evaluate the Fine-grAined issUe solviNg capabilities of LLMs.<n>It is constructed using a dataset curated from 30 well-known GitHub repositories.<n>We evaluate ten LLMs with FAUN-Eval, including four closed-source and six open-source models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-27T03:25:44Z)
• ToolScan: A Benchmark for Characterizing Errors in Tool-Use LLMs [77.79172008184415]
  TOOLSCAN is a new benchmark to identify error patterns in LLM output on tool-use tasks.<n>We show that even the most prominent LLMs exhibit these error patterns in their outputs.<n>Researchers can use these insights from TOOLSCAN to guide their error mitigation strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-20T18:56:22Z)
• LLM Self-Correction with DeCRIM: Decompose, Critique, and Refine for Enhanced Following of Instructions with Multiple Constraints [86.59857711385833]
  We introduce RealInstruct, the first benchmark designed to evaluate LLMs' ability to follow real-world multi-constrained instructions. To address the performance gap between open-source and proprietary models, we propose the Decompose, Critique and Refine (DeCRIM) self-correction pipeline. Our results show that DeCRIM improves Mistral's performance by 7.3% on RealInstruct and 8.0% on IFEval even with weak feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T01:25:10Z)
• SELF-GUIDE: Better Task-Specific Instruction Following via Self-Synthetic Finetuning [70.21358720599821]
  Large language models (LLMs) hold the promise of solving diverse tasks when provided with appropriate natural language prompts. We propose SELF-GUIDE, a multi-stage mechanism in which we synthesize task-specific input-output pairs from the student LLM. We report an absolute improvement of approximately 15% for classification tasks and 18% for generation tasks in the benchmark's metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T04:41:58Z)
• REQUAL-LM: Reliability and Equity through Aggregation in Large Language Models [10.684722193666607]
  We introduce REQUAL-LM, a novel method for finding reliable and equitable large language models (LLMs) outputs through aggregation. Specifically, we develop a Monte Carlo method based on repeated sampling to find a reliable output close to the mean of the underlying distribution of possible outputs. We formally define the terms such as reliability and bias, and design an equity-aware aggregation to minimize harmful bias while finding a highly reliable output.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-17T22:12:41Z)
• MiniCheck: Efficient Fact-Checking of LLMs on Grounding Documents [62.02920842630234]
  We show how to build small fact-checking models that have GPT-4-level performance but for 400x lower cost. We do this by constructing synthetic training data with GPT-4, which involves creating realistic yet challenging instances of factual errors. For evaluation, we unify datasets from recent work on fact-checking and grounding LLM generations into a new benchmark, LLM-AggreFact.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T17:59:10Z)
• $\forall$uto$\exists$val: Autonomous Assessment of LLMs in Formal Synthesis and Interpretation Tasks [21.12437562185667]
  This paper presents a new approach for scaling LLM assessment in translating formal syntax to natural language. We use context-free grammars (CFGs) to generate out-of-distribution datasets on the fly. We also conduct an assessment of several SOTA closed and open-source LLMs to showcase the feasibility and scalability of this paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-27T08:08:00Z)
• Assessing the Reliability of Large Language Model Knowledge [78.38870272050106]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been treated as knowledge bases due to their strong performance in knowledge probing tasks. How do we evaluate the capabilities of LLMs to consistently produce factually correct answers? We propose MOdel kNowledge relIabiliTy scORe (MONITOR), a novel metric designed to directly measure LLMs' factual reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-15T12:40:30Z)

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.