ReliableTableQA:How Much Supervision Does Reliability Annotation Need?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.20537v1
• Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2026 16:57:30 GMT
• Title: ReliableTableQA:How Much Supervision Does Reliability Annotation Need?
• Abstract summary: We introduce ReliableTableQA, a framework for training an LLM to annotate the statistical reliability of QA results.<n>We quantify the Unreliable Confident Answer Rate (UCAR), a failure we quantify as the Unreliable Confident Answer Rate (UCAR)<n>Our findings reframe reliability annotation as a data-efficiency problem and delineate precisely when reinforcement fine-tuning does and does not pay off.
• Score: 1.3152347996965301
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: We introduce ReliableTableQA, a framework for training an LLM to annotate the statistical reliability of tabular QA results, not whether the query is answerable, but whether the computed answer is statistically meaningful. In real enterprise analytics, a syntactically correct SQL query can return a value that is based on too small a sample, has an excessively wide confidence interval, or is too confounded to support action. Existing systems answer confidently in all such cases, a failure we quantify as the Unreliable Confident Answer Rate (UCAR). We contribute (1) a ten-category reliability taxonomy (R1-R10) covering hazards such as small-sample aggregates, multiple-comparison inflation, and distribution-tail mismatch; (2) a program-first data pipeline that generates 50,000 reliability-labeled training examples from a context-free grammar over public retail schemas, with schema-stratified SFT/GRPO splits; and (3) a controlled study of how much supervision calibrated reliability annotation actually requires. We find that a small, schema-stratified SFT set is remarkably sufficient: 200 examples raise reliability-flag F1 from 0.61 to 0.98 and parse rate from 0.52 to 1.00, drive UCAR to zero, and yield a model that generalizes to an unseen retail domain (Rel-F1 0.997 on held-out H&M). Against this strong SFT baseline, GRPO, commonly assumed to be essential, helps only when SFT is under-trained (+0.06-0.16 exact-flag-set match at 100 examples, in- and out-of-distribution) and provides no measurable benefit once SFT is adequate, a null result we confirm across a hard compound-flag slice, a strict exact-match metric, and out-of-distribution evaluation. Our findings reframe reliability annotation as a data-efficiency problem and delineate precisely when reinforcement fine-tuning does and does not pay off.

Related papers

• The Reliability Gap in Benchmark Auditing: Distribution Shift and Scale as Failure Modes of Contamination Detection [4.921591758479804]
  Statistical tools for detecting training-data membership exist, but have been validated almost exclusively in controlled academic regimes.<n>We identify two under-studied failure modes: distribution shift and scale constraints.<n>Across 335 evaluations, only 199 yield correct outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-02T08:21:22Z)
• Measuring Five-Nines Reliability: Sample-Efficient LLM Evaluation in Saturated Benchmarks [45.86413490112477]
  Large language models (LLMs) are used in reliability-sensitive applications.<n>Estimateing rare failure probability with tight confidence bounds requires prohibitively large LLM inference sizes.<n>We propose to learn a sampling distribution concentrated on failure-prone inputs via the cross-entropy method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-11T20:23:44Z)
• Know When You're Wrong: Aligning Confidence with Correctness for LLM Error Detection [0.0]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in critical decision-making systems.<n>We introduce a normalized confidence score based on output anchor token probabilities.<n>This enables direct detection of errors and hallucinations with minimal overhead.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-18T07:05:12Z)
• The GT-Score: A Robust Objective Function for Reducing Overfitting in Data-Driven Trading Strategies [51.56484100374058]
  GT-Score is a composite objective function that integrates performance, statistical significance, consistency, and downside risk.<n>In walk-forward validation, GT-Score improves the generalization ratio by 98% relative to baseline objective functions.<n>These results suggest that embedding an anti-overfitting structure into the objective can improve the reliability of backtests in quantitative research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-22T05:16:47Z)
• Replayable Financial Agents: A Determinism-Faithfulness Assurance Harness for Tool-Using LLM Agents [0.7699235580548228]
  LLM agents struggle with regulatory audit replay: when asked to reproduce a transaction flagged decision with identical inputs, most deployments fail to return consistent results.<n>This paper introduces the DeterminismFaithfulness Assurance Harness (DFAH), a framework for measuring trajectory determinism and evidence-conditioned faithfulness in tool-using agents deployed in financial services.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-17T19:47:55Z)
• Large Language Models Are Bad Dice Players: LLMs Struggle to Generate Random Numbers from Statistical Distributions [50.1404916337174]
  We present the first large-scale, statistically powered audit of native probabilistic sampling in large language models (LLMs)<n>We show that batch generation achieves only modest statistical validity, with a 13% median pass rate, while independent requests collapse almost entirely.<n>We conclude that current LLMs lack a functional internal sampler, necessitating the use of external tools for applications requiring statistical guarantees.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-08T22:33:12Z)
• TrustJudge: Inconsistencies of LLM-as-a-Judge and How to Alleviate Them [58.04324690859212]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) as automated evaluators (LLM-as-a-judge) has revealed critical inconsistencies in current evaluation frameworks.<n>We identify two fundamental types of inconsistencies: Score-Comparison Inconsistency and Pairwise Transitivity Inconsistency.<n>We propose TrustJudge, a probabilistic framework that addresses these limitations through two key innovations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T13:04:29Z)
• From Embeddings to Equations: Genetic-Programming Surrogates for Interpretable Transformer Classification [9.17282078449475]
  We study symbolic surrogate modeling of frozen Transformer embeddings to obtain compact, auditable classifiers with calibrated probabilities.<n>For five benchmarks (SST2G, 20NG, MNIST, CIFAR10, MSC17), embeddings from ModernBERT, DINOv2, and SigLIP are partitioned on the training set into disjoint, information-preserving views.<n>A cooperative multi-population genetic program (MEGP) then learns additive, closed-form logit programs over these views.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-16T02:17:04Z)
• Probabilistically Tightened Linear Relaxation-based Perturbation Analysis for Neural Network Verification [83.25968588249776]
  We present a novel framework that combines over-approximation techniques from LiRPA-based approaches with a sampling-based method to compute tight intermediate reachable sets.<n>With negligible computational overhead, $textttPT-LiRPA$ exploiting the estimated reachable sets, significantly tightens the lower and upper linear bounds of a neural network's output.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-07T18:45:53Z)
• 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)
• Conservative Prediction via Data-Driven Confidence Minimization [70.93946578046003]
  In safety-critical applications of machine learning, it is often desirable for a model to be conservative. We propose the Data-Driven Confidence Minimization framework, which minimizes confidence on an uncertainty dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-08T07:05:36Z)
• Adversarial Training with Rectified Rejection [114.83821848791206]
  We propose to use true confidence (T-Con) as a certainty oracle, and learn to predict T-Con by rectifying confidence. We prove that under mild conditions, a rectified confidence (R-Con) rejector and a confidence rejector can be coupled to distinguish any wrongly classified input from correctly classified ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-31T08:24:53Z)

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.