Uncertainty-Aware Generation and Decision-Making Under Ambiguity

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.30578v1
• Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2026 17:20:43 GMT
• Title: Uncertainty-Aware Generation and Decision-Making Under Ambiguity
• Abstract summary: We present and evaluate various uncertainty-aware decision-making algorithms based on Bayesian decision theory and risk-averse decision making.<n>We find empirically that these algorithms can improve the utility of the generations but need to be carefully implemented when ambiguity is high.
• Score: 57.15357080072861
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: With rapidly improving capabilities, Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in many complex real-world tasks. Beyond requiring in-depth knowledge and reasoning skills, many of these tasks exhibit a high degree of subjectivity and require that the outputs of the model can be trusted. While a lot of progress has been made to train better models, decision-making algorithms have received less attention. In this work, we present and evaluate various uncertainty-aware decision-making algorithms based on Bayesian decision theory and risk-averse decision making on the tasks of tutoring and automatic peer reviewing. Concretely, we take uncertainty over tutoring strategies and review scores into account when generating a tutor response or review and use conformal prediction to provide guarantees over strategy and score. We find empirically that these algorithms can improve the utility of the generations but need to be carefully implemented when ambiguity is high. For example, risk-averse rules can degrade performance by optimizing for generic outputs, while Bayesian methods tend to perform better. Our work uses techniques from decision theory to improve LLM-based decision-making and outlines open challenges for the community.

Related papers

• LLMs for Explainable Business Decision-Making: A Reinforcement Learning Fine-Tuning Approach [9.942833203981069]
  Large language models (LLMs) present an opportunity to generate natural-language explanations.<n>We introduce LEXMA, a reinforcement-learning-based fine-tuning framework that produces audience-appropriate explanations.<n>LEXMA yields significant improvements in predictive performance compared with other LLM baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-10T04:16:31Z)
• Conformalized Decision Risk Assessment [5.391713612899277]
  We introduce CREDO, a novel framework that quantifies for any candidate decision, a distribution-free upper bound on the probability that the decision is suboptimal.<n>By combining inverse optimization geometry with conformal prediction and generative modeling, CREDO produces risk certificates that are both statistically rigorous and practically interpretable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T15:24:38Z)
• MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs [55.20845457594977]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making.<n>We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill.<n>Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T03:50:23Z)
• Balancing Rigor and Utility: Mitigating Cognitive Biases in Large Language Models for Multiple-Choice Questions [0.46873264197900916]
  We show that certain cognitive biases can enhance decision-making efficiency through rational deviations and shortcuts.<n>By introducing moderation and an abstention option, we reduce error rates, improve decision accuracy, and optimize decision rates.<n>This approach offers a novel way to leverage cognitive biases to improve the practical utility of large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-16T16:25:22Z)
• On strategies for risk management and decision making under uncertainty shared across multiple fields [55.2480439325792]
  The paper finds more than 110 examples of such strategies and this approach to risk is termed RDOT: Risk-reducing Design and Operations Toolkit.<n>RDOT strategies fall into six broad categories: structural, reactive, formal, adversarial, multi-stage and positive.<n>Overall, RDOT represents an overlooked class of versatile responses to uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-06T16:14:32Z)
• Rational Decision-Making Agent with Internalized Utility Judgment [88.01612847081677]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable advancements and have attracted significant efforts to develop LLMs into agents capable of executing intricate multi-step decision-making tasks beyond traditional NLP applications.<n>This paper proposes RadAgent, which fosters the development of its rationality through an iterative framework involving Experience Exploration and Utility Learning.<n> Experimental results on the ToolBench dataset demonstrate RadAgent's superiority over baselines, achieving over 10% improvement in Pass Rate on diverse tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-24T03:11:45Z)
• On solving decision and risk management problems subject to uncertainty [91.3755431537592]
  Uncertainty is a pervasive challenge in decision and risk management. This paper develops a systematic understanding of such strategies, determine their range of application, and develop a framework to better employ them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-18T19:16:23Z)
• Inverse Online Learning: Understanding Non-Stationary and Reactionary Policies [79.60322329952453]
  We show how to develop interpretable representations of how agents make decisions. By understanding the decision-making processes underlying a set of observed trajectories, we cast the policy inference problem as the inverse to this online learning problem. We introduce a practical algorithm for retrospectively estimating such perceived effects, alongside the process through which agents update them. Through application to the analysis of UNOS organ donation acceptance decisions, we demonstrate that our approach can bring valuable insights into the factors that govern decision processes and how they change over time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-14T17:40:42Z)
• Improving Human Sequential Decision-Making with Reinforcement Learning [29.334511328067777]
  We design a novel machine learning algorithm that is capable of extracting "best practices" from trace data. Our algorithm selects the tip that best bridges the gap between the actions taken by human workers and those taken by the optimal policy. Experiments show that the tips generated by our algorithm can significantly improve human performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-19T02:57:58Z)
• Decision Rule Elicitation for Domain Adaptation [93.02675868486932]
  Human-in-the-loop machine learning is widely used in artificial intelligence (AI) to elicit labels from experts. In this work, we allow experts to additionally produce decision rules describing their decision-making. We show that decision rule elicitation improves domain adaptation of the algorithm and helps to propagate expert's knowledge to the AI model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-23T08:07:22Z)
• Leveraging Expert Consistency to Improve Algorithmic Decision Support [62.61153549123407]
  We explore the use of historical expert decisions as a rich source of information that can be combined with observed outcomes to narrow the construct gap. We propose an influence function-based methodology to estimate expert consistency indirectly when each case in the data is assessed by a single expert. Our empirical evaluation, using simulations in a clinical setting and real-world data from the child welfare domain, indicates that the proposed approach successfully narrows the construct gap.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-24T05:40:29Z)

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.