YUKTI: From Natural-Language Situations to Robust, Verifiable Decisions An Uncertainty-Typed Proposition IR, Assumption-Robust Pareto Frontiers, and a Regret Certificate

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.09706v1
• Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2026 09:29:13 GMT
• Title: YUKTI: From Natural-Language Situations to Robust, Verifiable Decisions An Uncertainty-Typed Proposition IR, Assumption-Robust Pareto Frontiers, and a Regret Certificate
• Abstract summary: We show that YUKTI routes each stage to an exact, nonlinear, or evolutionary solver.<n>We prove a bound making rho an exact factor of decision regret, add auditable traceability, and synthesize a benchmark-faithful data foundation.<n>We validate three ways: under controlled misspecification the robust compromise cuts mean and tail regret by over 90% versus a naive point plan; and on a regulated commercial decision we optimize inside a lawful action space and price the downside in euros.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Language models turn a worded situation into a numeric plan, and the dominant pipelines (NL4Opt, OptiMUS, ORLM, OR-LLM-Agent) commit to a single objective and point-valued coefficients, then solve once. For decisions that allocate real budget, effort, or clinical attention, that confidence is the failure mode: every objectified number is an assumption, and a plan optimal only if the guesses are exactly right is fragile -- mimicry of computation. YUKTI changes the target of autoformulation. Its representation is a typed-proposition graph whose relationships carry shape priors, coefficient uncertainty, and provenance. YUKTI routes each stage to an exact, nonlinear, or evolutionary solver; couples stages by a distributional Pareto hand-off; and introduces Assumption-Robust Pareto Frontiers (ARPF), resampling assumptions (including structural epsilon-contamination) to score how often each action survives (rho). We prove a bound making rho an exact factor of decision regret, add auditable traceability, and synthesize a benchmark-faithful data foundation when none exists (SRJANA). We validate three ways: under controlled misspecification the robust compromise cuts mean and tail regret by over 90% versus a naive point plan; on a regulated commercial decision we optimize inside a lawful action space and price the downside in euros; and on a real public dataset of 41,188 decisions an out-of-sample backtest beats the logged status quo by 34% and a naive point rule by 4% while reducing the optimizer's curse. The solvers are standard; we claim no benchmark-SOTA win. A head-to-head shows an LLM given the correct numbers, and single-objective optimization, both incur about 47x the held-out regret of YUKTI -- an LLM is a formulator, not a solver. Under long-range causal coupling, the forward hand-off becomes unsound, locating where it must become a backward-induction causal policy.

Related papers

• PRIMUS: Identity, Governance, and Verification for Multi-Agent Federations [0.0]
  Multi-agent federations need governance that answers three questions under adversarial conditions.<n>We present PRIMUS, which couples prime-power identity with BLS aggregate signatures.<n>We ask whether PRIMA's binary artifact-fidelity verdict can be converted into a graded fitness signal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-07T19:21:49Z)
• Accurate Ensembles, Fragile Narratives: Multi-Scale Stacking and a Fidelity Audit of LLM-Generated Explanations for Credit Risk [0.0]
  Credit scoring increasingly relies on models whose decision logic cannot be read off their parameters.<n>A common proposal closes that gap with a language model: compute feature attributions, hand them to an LLM, and let it write the rationale.<n>We build such a system end to end and test whether the second half of the promise holds.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-08T13:22:14Z)
• Decision Kernels for Quantum Error Mitigation: Why Accuracy Gains Need Not Improve Downstream Decisions [0.0]
  We develop a theory of finite-shot QEM for downstream decisions.<n>We prove quotient factorization, gap-law minimality, a marginal no-go theorem, a QEM pullback theorem, and a fixed-allocation shot-level converse.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-03T02:35:57Z)
• DeFAb: A Verifiable Benchmark for Defeasible Abduction in Foundation Models [6.628401122676601]
  A rule-based logic solver resolves every instance in our benchmark in under 50 microseconds with 100% accuracy.<n>We introduce DeFAb (Defeasible Abduction Benchmark), a dataset and generation pipeline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-17T00:13:40Z)
• DISA: Offline Importance Sampling for Distribution-Matching LLM-RL [56.9445657766829]
  We introduce DISA, which moves this calibration problem outside the RL loop.<n> DISA draws proposal trajectories offline, estimates the partition function via importance sampling, and freezes the resulting partition-function estimate.<n>On two open-weight backbones across six math and three code benchmarks, DISA matches or exceeds the online-coupled distribution-matching baseline Flow.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T07:14:44Z)
• Pause and Reflect: Conformal Aggregation for Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [8.024041325202612]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning with self-consistency improves performance by aggregating multiple sampled reasoning paths.<n>We introduce a conformal procedure for CoT reasoning that directly addresses aggregation uncertainty.<n>Our approach replaces majority voting with weighted score aggregation over reasoning paths and calibrates an abstention rule using conformal risk control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T20:33:59Z)
• Hidden Measurement Error in LLM Pipelines Distorts Annotation, Evaluation, and Benchmarking [0.20305676256390937]
  This paper decomposes uncertainty into its sources, distinguishes variance that shrinks with more data, and uses design-study projections to reduce total error.<n>Applying the approach to ideology annotation, safety classification, MMLU benchmarking, and a human-validated propaganda audit reveals different dominant variance sources by domain and scoring method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-13T14:58:15Z)
• Correct Answers from Sound Reasoning: Verifiable Process Supervision for Language Models [94.68358825189738]
  We propose a post-training framework for verifiable domains that jointly optimize prediction accuracy and reasoning quality.<n>We evaluate VPS on chess, a controlled testbed where reasoning steps can be deterministically verified against engine signals.<n>VPS preserves accuracy while significantly improving reasoning quality, reducing win-rate error by up to 30% and restoring consistency to near saturation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-03T15:19:46Z)
• ODAR: Principled Adaptive Routing for LLM Reasoning via Active Inference [60.958331943869126]
  ODAR-Expert is an adaptive routing framework that optimize the accuracy-efficiency trade-off via principled resource allocation.<n>We show strong and consistent gains, including 98.2% accuracy on MATH and 54.8% on Humanity's Last Exam.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T05:22:01Z)
• LEC: Linear Expectation Constraints for False-Discovery Control in Selective Prediction and Routing Systems [95.35293543918762]
  Large language models (LLMs) often generate unreliable answers, while uncertainty methods fail to fully distinguish correct from incorrect predictions.<n>We address this issue through the lens of false discovery rate (FDR) control, ensuring that among all accepted predictions, the proportion of errors does not exceed a target risk level.<n>We propose LEC, which reinterprets selective prediction as a constrained decision problem by enforcing a Linear Expectation Constraint.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-01T11:27:09Z)
• COIN: Uncertainty-Guarding Selective Question Answering for Foundation Models with Provable Risk Guarantees [51.5976496056012]
  COIN is an uncertainty-guarding selection framework that calibrates statistically valid thresholds to filter a single generated answer per question.<n>COIN estimates the empirical error rate on a calibration set and applies confidence interval methods to establish a high-probability upper bound on the true error rate.<n>We demonstrate COIN's robustness in risk control, strong test-time power in retaining admissible answers, and predictive efficiency under limited calibration data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-25T07:04:49Z)
• Local Discovery by Partitioning: Polynomial-Time Causal Discovery Around Exposure-Outcome Pairs [18.31538168213386]
  We propose local discovery by partitioning (LDP) for causal inference tasks. LDP is a constraint-based procedure that returns a VAS for an exposure-outcome pair under latent confounding. Adjustment sets from LDP yield less biased and more precise average treatment effect estimates than baseline discovery algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-25T14:53:10Z)
• On the Practicality of Differential Privacy in Federated Learning by Tuning Iteration Times [51.61278695776151]
  Federated Learning (FL) is well known for its privacy protection when training machine learning models among distributed clients collaboratively. Recent studies have pointed out that the naive FL is susceptible to gradient leakage attacks. Differential Privacy (DP) emerges as a promising countermeasure to defend against gradient leakage attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-11T19:43:12Z)

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.