Learning Whom to Trust : Decision-Generated Credibility in Social Learning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.24851v1
• Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2026 17:39:32 GMT
• Title: Learning Whom to Trust : Decision-Generated Credibility in Social Learning
• Abstract summary: Social interaction can improve collective learning but also amplify early mistakes.<n>We study this tension when the credibility of social information is generated by the sender's own decision process rather than fixed ex ante.
• Score: 0.7734726150561086
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Social interaction can improve collective learning but also amplify early mistakes. We study this tension when the credibility of social information is generated by the sender's own decision process rather than fixed ex ante. Reinforcement-learning agents make binary choices through a drift--diffusion process that jointly determines choice, decision time, and confidence; decision confidence then becomes social credibility by weighting anticipatory influence and retrospective social learning. Under balanced community exposure, the anticipatory field admits an exact quotient representation. Its local Jacobian is a scalar decision-sensitivity term multiplying the community-coupling matrix, which yields a common-mode amplification threshold and an analytical role for cross-community permeability in damping relative community differences. Monte Carlo experiments show the corresponding non-monotone performance pattern: moderate transmission accelerates correction, whereas strong transmission can lock populations into wrong consensus; low permeability instead sustains disagreement. Ablations reveal a dual role for confidence: credibility-sensitive transmission amplifies social error, while confidence-dependent private learning stabilises it. The model yields testable predictions linking sender confidence to receiver behaviour conditional on accuracy.

Related papers

• When Confidence Signals Disagree: Local and Global Confidence in Autoregressive Language Models [0.0]
  We investigate whether different confidence readouts are empirically interchangeable in an autoregressive language model.<n>Across MMLU and ARC Challenge, the two signals are weakly correlated and differ substantially in their association with correctness.<n>Larger local--global confidence gaps are associated with higher answer entropy, more distinct sampled answers, and lower modal-answer concentration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-15T10:08:48Z)
• Modeling Misinformation as a Commons Problem [0.0]
  This paper presents an agent-based simulation that frames trust as a collective resource and attention as a scarce private budget.<n>Across experiments, the model produces four recurring modes: credible stability, misinformation dominance, polarization, and a mixed baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-08T04:11:48Z)
• TCHG: Tri-Trust Conditioned Heterogeneous Graph Learning for Reliable Dynamic Trust Prediction [5.435667023660699]
  Graph neural networks have become a prominent approach to trust prediction because of their ability to learn network structures and complex trust dependencies.<n>This paper argues that trust evidence should not be treated as an undifferentiated input, but should be used as functional control factors over graph propagation.<n>We propose TCHG, a tri-trust conditioned heterogeneous graph learning framework that decomposes trust evidence into three channels and assigns them distinct functional roles in propagation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-15T12:01:34Z)
• You Can't Fool Us: Understanding the Resilience of LLM-driven Agent Communities to Misinformation [4.689458744333872]
  We study how political ideology and open-minded thinking shape community responses to credible misinformation.<n>We find that higher AOT improves both resistance to misinformation uptake and recovery after trust peaks.<n>PI shapes the recovery pathway: ideologically moderate communities recover more reliably, while polarized communities retain more residual support.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T09:45:33Z)
• Multimodal Learning on Low-Quality Data with Conformal Predictive Self-Calibration [72.0672328514289]
  Multimodal learning often grapples with the challenge of low-quality data.<n>We propose a unified framework, termed Conformal Predictive Self-Calibration.<n>Our framework consistently outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-05T14:48:52Z)
• Process Supervision of Confidence Margin for Calibrated LLM Reasoning [52.373121066425455]
  Scaling test-time computation with reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as a reliable path to improve large language models (LLM) reasoning ability.<n>Yet, outcome-based reward often incentivizes models to be overconfident, leading to hallucinations, unreliable confidence-based control, and unnecessary compute allocation.<n>We introduce Reinforcement Learning with Confidence Margin (textbfRLCM), a calibration-aware RL framework that jointly optimize correctness and confidence reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-25T14:40:13Z)
• 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)
• VI-CuRL: Stabilizing Verifier-Independent RL Reasoning via Confidence-Guided Variance Reduction [55.04308051033549]
  Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) has emerged as a dominant paradigm for enhancing Large Language Models (LLMs) reasoning.<n>We introduceVerifier-Independent Curriculum Reinforcement Learning (VI-CuRL), a framework that leverages the model's intrinsic confidence to construct a curriculum independent from external verifiers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-13T03:40:52Z)
• Making Bias Non-Predictive: Training Robust LLM Judges via Reinforcement Learning [91.8584139564909]
  Large language models (LLMs) increasingly serve as automated judges, yet they remain susceptible to cognitive biases.<n>We propose Epistemic Independence Training (EIT), a reinforcement learning framework grounded in a key principle.<n>EIT operationalizes this through a balanced conflict strategy where bias signals are equally likely to support correct and incorrect answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T01:43:48Z)
• Learning to Trust Experience: A Monitor-Trust-Regulator Framework for Learning under Unobservable Feedback Reliability [24.97566911521709]
  We study Epistemic Identifiability under Unobservable Reliability (EIUR)<n>Standard robust learning can converge stably yet form high-confidence, systematically wrong beliefs.<n>We propose metacognitive regulation as a practical response: a second, introspective control loop that infers experience credibility from endogenous evidence in the learner's internal dynamics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-14T07:52:14Z)
• Decoding Susceptibility: Modeling Misbelief to Misinformation Through a Computational Approach [61.04606493712002]
  Susceptibility to misinformation describes the degree of belief in unverifiable claims that is not observable. Existing susceptibility studies heavily rely on self-reported beliefs. We propose a computational approach to model users' latent susceptibility levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T07:22:56Z)
• Shades of confusion: Lexical uncertainty modulates ad hoc coordination in an interactive communication task [8.17947290421835]
  We propose a communication task based on color-concept associations. In Experiment 1, we establish several key properties of the mental representations of these expectations. In Experiment 2, we examine the downstream consequences of these representations for communication.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-13T20:42:28Z)

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.