Verify Before You Commit: Towards Faithful Reasoning in LLM Agents via Self-Auditing
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.08401v1
- Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2026 16:01:03 GMT
- Title: Verify Before You Commit: Towards Faithful Reasoning in LLM Agents via Self-Auditing
- Abstract summary: We propose textbfSelf-textbfAudited textbfVerified textbfReasoning (textscSAVeR), a novel framework that enforces verification over internal belief states within the agent before action commitment.<n>Our approach consistently improves reasoning faithfulness while preserving competitive end-task performance.
- Score: 5.497064111008921
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: In large language model (LLM) agents, reasoning trajectories are treated as reliable internal beliefs for guiding actions and updating memory. However, coherent reasoning can still violate logical or evidential constraints, allowing unsupported beliefs repeatedly stored and propagated across decision steps, leading to systematic behavioral drift in long-horizon agentic systems. Most existing strategies rely on the consensus mechanism, conflating agreement with faithfulness. In this paper, inspired by the vulnerability of unfaithful intermediate reasoning trajectories, we propose \textbf{S}elf-\textbf{A}udited \textbf{Ve}rified \textbf{R}easoning (\textsc{SAVeR}), a novel framework that enforces verification over internal belief states within the agent before action commitment, achieving faithful reasoning. Concretely, we structurally generate persona-based diverse candidate beliefs for selection under a faithfulness-relevant structure space. To achieve reasoning faithfulness, we perform adversarial auditing to localize violations and repair through constraint-guided minimal interventions under verifiable acceptance criteria. Extensive experiments on six benchmark datasets demonstrate that our approach consistently improves reasoning faithfulness while preserving competitive end-task performance.
Related papers
- Do Vision-Language-Action Models Mean What They Say? On the Role of Faithfulness in Embodied Reasoning [17.56588495990139]
Embodied Chain-of-Thought has emerged as a promising mechanism to enhance robot decision-making.<n>We argue that SoTA alignment strategies offer a necessary but insufficient notion of faithfulness.<n>We operationalize a behavioral surrogate for embodied faithfulness through a learned critic, Pinocchio.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-06T05:10:27Z) - FACT-E: Causality-Inspired Evaluation for Trustworthy Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [49.65751420291115]
Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has improved LLM reasoning, but models often generate explanations that appear coherent while containing unfaithful intermediate steps.<n>We propose FACT-E, a causality-inspired framework for evaluating CoT quality.<n>We show that FACT-E improves reasoning-trajectory selection and yields stronger in-context learnings.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-12T15:35:08Z) - Less Approximates More: Harmonizing Performance and Confidence Faithfulness via Hybrid Post-Training for High-Stakes Tasks [52.81286869496811]
Large language models are increasingly deployed in high-stakes tasks, where confident yet incorrect inferences may cause real-world harm.<n>We propose to jointly optimize unsupervised Reinforcement Learning from Internal Feedback with reasoning-trace-guided Reasoning Distillation.<n>We introduce HyTuning, a hybrid post-training framework that adaptively reweights RD and RLIF via a PRG-style metric.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-09T16:50:11Z) - LaSER: Internalizing Explicit Reasoning into Latent Space for Dense Retrieval [74.72139580745511]
LaSER is a novel self-distillation framework that internalizes explicit reasoning into the latent space of retrievers.<n>Our method successfully combines the reasoning depth of explicit CoT pipelines with the inference efficiency of standard dense retrievers.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-02T04:11:18Z) - Balancing Faithfulness and Performance in Reasoning via Multi-Listener Soft Execution [79.98699884805636]
Reasoning Execution by Multiple Listeners (REMUL) is a multi-party reinforcement learning approach.<n>REMUL builds on the hypothesis that reasoning traces which other parties can follow will be more faithful.<n>Speakers are rewarded for producing reasoning that is clear to listeners.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-18T02:55:55Z) - DRAFT: Task Decoupled Latent Reasoning for Agent Safety [59.46137757545185]
We propose DRAFT (Task Decoupled Latent Reasoning for Agent Safety), a latent reasoning framework that decouples safety judgment into two trainable stages.<n>An Extractor distills the full trajectory into a compact continuous latent draft, and a Reasoner that jointly attends to the draft and the original trajectory to predict safety.<n>DRAFT consistently outperforms strong baselines, improving accuracy from 63.27% (LoRA) to 91.18% averaged over benchmarks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-02-11T07:45:14Z) - Gaming the Judge: Unfaithful Chain-of-Thought Can Undermine Agent Evaluation [76.5533899503582]
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as judges to evaluate agent performance.<n>We show this paradigm implicitly assumes that the agent's chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning faithfully reflects both its internal reasoning and the underlying environment state.<n>We demonstrate that manipulated reasoning alone can inflate false positive rates of state-of-the-art VLM judges by up to 90% across 800 trajectories spanning diverse web tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-21T06:07:43Z) - 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) - Journey Before Destination: On the importance of Visual Faithfulness in Slow Thinking [11.763473690046721]
Reasoning-augmented vision language models generate explicit chains of thought that promise greater capability and transparency.<n>Models may reach correct answers via visually unfaithful intermediate steps, or reason faithfully yet fail on the final prediction.<n>We introduce the visual faithfulness of reasoning chains as a distinct evaluation dimension, focusing on whether the perception steps of a reasoning chain are grounded in the image.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-13T07:04:42Z) - TRACE: A Framework for Analyzing and Enhancing Stepwise Reasoning in Vision-Language Models [9.607579442309639]
We introduce TRACE, a framework for Transparent Reasoning And Consistency Evaluation.<n>At its core, TRACEleverages Auxiliary Reasoning Sets to decompose complex problems.<n>Our experiments show that consistency across ARS correlates with final-answer correctness.<n>TRACE defines confidence regions that distinguish reliable from unreliable reasoning paths.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-05T18:40:18Z) - FaithAct: Faithfulness Planning and Acting in MLLMs [12.08093899815684]
Unfaithfulness remains a persistent challenge for large language models.<n>We introduce FaithEval for quantifying step-level and chain-level faithfulness by evaluating whether each claimed object is visually supported by the image.<n>We propose FaithAct, a faithfulness-first planning and acting framework that enforces evidential grounding at every reasoning step.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-11-11T16:22:49Z) - FaithCoT-Bench: Benchmarking Instance-Level Faithfulness of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [62.452350134196934]
FaithCoT-Bench is a unified benchmark for instance-level CoT unfaithfulness detection.<n>Our framework formulates unfaithfulness detection as a discriminative decision problem.<n>FaithCoT-Bench sets a solid basis for future research toward more interpretable and trustworthy reasoning in LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-05T05:16:54Z)
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.