Towards Trustworthy Report Generation: A Deep Research Agent with Progressive Confidence Estimation and Calibration
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.05952v1
- Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2026 14:46:26 GMT
- Title: Towards Trustworthy Report Generation: A Deep Research Agent with Progressive Confidence Estimation and Calibration
- Abstract summary: We propose a novel deep research agent that incorporates progressive confidence estimation and calibration within the report generation pipeline.<n> Experimental results and case studies demonstrate that our method substantially improves interpretability and significantly increases user trust.
- Score: 2.8268726984243497
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: As agent-based systems continue to evolve, deep research agents are capable of automatically generating research-style reports across diverse domains. While these agents promise to streamline information synthesis and knowledge exploration, existing evaluation frameworks-typically based on subjective dimensions-fail to capture a critical aspect of report quality: trustworthiness. In open-ended research scenarios where ground-truth answers are unavailable, current evaluation methods cannot effectively measure the epistemic confidence of generated content, making calibration difficult and leaving users susceptible to misleading or hallucinated information. To address this limitation, we propose a novel deep research agent that incorporates progressive confidence estimation and calibration within the report generation pipeline. Our system leverages a deliberative search model, featuring deep retrieval and multi-hop reasoning to ground outputs in verifiable evidence while assigning confidence scores to individual claims. Combined with a carefully designed workflow, this approach produces trustworthy reports with enhanced transparency. Experimental results and case studies demonstrate that our method substantially improves interpretability and significantly increases user trust.
Related papers
- Future Confidence Distillation in Large Language Models [0.0]
Existing approaches largely treat confidence as a property of completed responses.<n>We investigate confidence from a temporal perspective by comparing pre-solution Feeling-of-Knowing (FOK) and post-solution Judgement-of-Learning (JOL) confidence estimates.<n>We show that post-solution confidence is consistently better calibrated and more discriminative than pre-solution confidence.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-08T16:43:11Z) - 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) - Towards trustworthy agentic AI: a comprehensive survey of safety, robustness, privacy, and system security [57.35851886874902]
Agentic AI systems execute complex tasks autonomously, but their multi-step trajectories introduce new failure modes that challenge trustworthiness.<n>This survey provides a focused examination of trustworthy agentic AI through two core dimensions that are critical for high-risk deployments.<n>For each dimension, we clarify key concepts, identify where risks emerge along the agent workflow, and summarize stage-targeted mitigation strategies.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-17T10:26:37Z) - Leveraging LLM Parametric Knowledge for Fact Checking without Retrieval [60.25608870901428]
Trustworthiness is a core research challenge for agentic AI systems built on Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We propose the task of fact-checking without retrieval, focusing on the verification of arbitrary natural language claims, independent of their source robustness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-05T18:42:51Z) - DREAM: Deep Research Evaluation with Agentic Metrics [21.555357444628044]
We propose DREAM (Deep Research Evaluation with Agentic Metrics), a framework that makes evaluation itself agentic.<n> DREAM structures assessment through an evaluation protocol combining query-agnostic metrics with adaptive metrics generated by a tool-calling agent.<n>Controlled evaluations demonstrate DREAM is significantly more sensitive to factual and temporal decay than existing benchmarks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-21T19:14:31Z) - BrowseConf: Confidence-Guided Test-Time Scaling for Web Agents [58.05949210993854]
We investigate whether search agents have the ability to communicate their own confidence through verbalized confidence scores after long sequences of actions.<n>We propose Test-Time Scaling (TTS) methods that use confidence scores to determine answer quality, encourage the model to try again until reaching a satisfactory confidence level.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-27T15:58:51Z) - Mind the Generation Process: Fine-Grained Confidence Estimation During LLM Generation [63.49409574310576]
Large language models (LLMs) exhibit overconfidence, assigning high confidence scores to incorrect predictions.<n>We introduce FineCE, a novel confidence estimation method that delivers accurate, fine-grained confidence scores during text generation.<n>Our code and all baselines used in the paper are available on GitHub.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-16T13:29:35Z) - Can LLMs Detect Their Confabulations? Estimating Reliability in Uncertainty-Aware Language Models [24.72990207218907]
Large Language Models (LLMs) are prone to generating fluent but incorrect content, known as confabulation.<n>We investigate how in-context information influences model behavior and whether LLMs can identify their unreliable responses.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-11T16:12:36Z) - A Context-Aware Dual-Metric Framework for Confidence Estimation in Large Language Models [6.62851757612838]
Current confidence estimation methods for large language models (LLMs) neglect the relevance between responses and contextual information.<n>We propose CRUX, which integrates context faithfulness and consistency for confidence estimation via two novel metrics.<n> Experiments across three benchmark datasets demonstrate CRUX's effectiveness, achieving the highest AUROC than existing baselines.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-01T12:58:34Z) - 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) - ParamMute: Suppressing Knowledge-Critical FFNs for Faithful Retrieval-Augmented Generation [91.20492150248106]
We investigate the internal mechanisms behind unfaithful generation and identify a subset of mid-to-deep feed-forward networks (FFNs) that are disproportionately activated in such cases.<n>We propose Parametric Knowledge Muting through FFN Suppression (ParamMute), a framework that improves contextual faithfulness by suppressing the activation of unfaithfulness-associated FFNs.<n> Experimental results show that ParamMute significantly enhances faithfulness across both CoFaithfulQA and the established ConFiQA benchmark, achieving substantial reductions in reliance on parametric memory.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-21T15:50:41Z) - Confidence Under the Hood: An Investigation into the Confidence-Probability Alignment in Large Language Models [14.5291643644017]
We introduce the concept of Confidence-Probability Alignment.
We probe the alignment between models' internal and expressed confidence.
Among the models analyzed, OpenAI's GPT-4 showed the strongest confidence-probability alignment.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-25T15:42:04Z)
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.