Approval Integrity and Recovery in LLM Answer Publication
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.15576v1
- Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 13:48:48 GMT
- Title: Approval Integrity and Recovery in LLM Answer Publication
- Abstract summary: LLM systems require binding approved content to its current authorization context.<n>We examine exact-content binding, authorization freshness and checkpoint recovery in Lightcap's publication enforcement mechanism.
- Score: 0.2864713389096699
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Publication integrity in LLM systems requires binding approved content to its current authorization context. We examine exact-content binding, authorization freshness and checkpoint recovery in Lightcap's publication enforcement mechanism. On 900 independently human-annotated RAGTruth responses from 150 source tasks, three dated Ministral models and a same-model direct-grounding baseline yield 3,600 assessments. The production response-act checker instantiated with 14B accepts 291 of 302 unsupported-labelled answers; the direct baseline accepts 41. Supported-answer retention is 95.2% and 66.9%, respectively. An exact promotion-correction identity tracks error through 100 chronological 3B-14B-8B-14B answer trajectories. Among 65 initially approved answers, the final stateful recheck-recovery policy increases exact-match error by 9.23 percentage points relative to the initial checkpoint (95% article-clustered interval [-1.72, 19.61]). Controlled evidence-fingerprint changes expose asymmetric freshness enforcement between publication and recovery. A separate BIPIA prompt-injection experiment records zero target insertions among 266 valid editor outputs. External Hugging Face calibration experiments transfer retrieval models from ArguAna to SciFact and NFCorpus, and diagnostic decision rules from Thunderbird to BGL, distinguishing probability calibration from ranking changes. The measurements separate semantic false approval, stale authorization and recovery-induced error at executable publication boundaries.
Related papers
- IdeaAMBIG: Benchmarking Implementation-Critical Gaps in Research-Idea Specifications [52.570108663867046]
A research idea may be novel, coherent, and scientifically plausible, yet its proposed method may remain insufficiently specified for faithful implementation.<n>We study the codification readiness of implementation-facing research-method specifications, defined by whether they provide sufficient methodological information for a competent implementer or coding agent to construct the intended method without unsupported assumptions.<n>We introduce IdeaAMBIG, a benchmark of 660 evidence-grounded instances: 163 real-world gaps from reports and GitHub issues, and 497 controlled synthetic gaps injected into codification-ready references.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-09-09T17:59:04Z) - AtomCite: Verification and Correction of Supplied Page-Level Citations in Multi-Page Documents [21.842813905857863]
AtomCite parses an answer into claims, checks each claim against the image of the cited page, and applies a deterministic repair policy.<n>It reaches around 93% binary verification accuracy on the injected benchmark, significantly outperforming every OCR-only condition.<n>Its repair policy lifts citation precision on the injected mix from a constructed 34% to 87-90% while retaining over 90% of correct claims.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-09-05T01:31:50Z) - Instruction Duplication as an Inference-Time Control Primitive [0.003596046562524959]
Procedural instruction following is a basic requirement for controllable language-model systems.<n>We introduce instruction duplication, a minimal black-box inference-time control that repeats only the procedural instruction.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-09-03T16:05:21Z) - Unmatched Does Not Mean False: Incomplete Reference Sets Can Reverse Calibration Rankings in Open-Ended Theory-of-Mind Tracking [0.5735035463793009]
Open-ended Theory-of-Mind (ToM) trackers emit valid beliefs absent from finite references.<n>A finite-reference-plus-matcher pipeline marks unmatched outputs false, creating proxy labels that can reverse proper-score model selection.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-26T11:36:31Z) - HIRA: A Human-in-the-Loop Retrieval-Augmented Cascade for Document Classification in Regulated Industries [1.5965246343492343]
HIRA is a training-free, on-premises retrieval-augmented cascade for document classification in regulated deployments.<n>Confident documents are classified directly by retrieval; uncertain or visually confusable documents are passed to a locally hosted verifier.<n>On a private 80-class trade-finance corpus, HIRA processes the full 30,233-document production stream while requesting human correction for only 1,945 documents.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-22T06:19:19Z) - What Would Fix This RAG Failure? Auditing Counterfactual Response with Paired Evidence Interventions [0.0]
We introduce Pair-ID, an offline audit that holds one query, retrieval state, and reader constant, then crosses two operations, adding missing support and deleting verified nonsupport, to measure a same-failure counterfactual response vector.<n>A complete funnel over 19,981 benchmark queries identifies 11,105 eligible Qwen failures, from which a prospectively fixed SHA-256 ordering selects 1,200 before generating any sampled response.<n>Results show that evidence sensitivity occurs at meaningful rates in the hash-selected eligible-failure sample, is only partially predictable from the observed failure, and is conditional on the reader.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-09T22:43:27Z) - SEER: A Self-Grounded Evidence Interface for Controlled Spatial Relation Classification [71.9783246097687]
SEER hides candidate relations during pair localization, constructs a query-specific view with explicit subject/object roles, and retains the full image and sparse box geometry as complementary evidence.<n>For relation-choice protocols with exact inverse support, an optional refinement swaps the entity roles and changes the forward decision only when exactly one visual state obeys the corresponding inverse relation.<n>The unchanged protocol yields +4.35 to +11.79 on all 2,434 filtered EmbSpatial pair-relation questions across three models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-04T13:16:15Z) - Visual Credit Audit for Multimodal Spatial Reasoning [70.16915309526443]
Visual Credit Audit separates two Estimands: whether the benchmark image gives the model's declared decision more support than text-only and blank controls, and whether the model responds to relation-specific visual evidence.<n>Applying labels yields dependence-credited correctness (D-CC)<n>Across four open MLLMs and two spatial benchmarks, 12.73-26.25% of decisions are correct yet uncredited.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-29T15:55:31Z) - Looping Is Not Reliability: State-Bound Evidence and Typed Revision Contracts for Agentic Code Repair [36.56438114281786]
We study the gap between finding a correct patch and retaining, verifying, and submitting it.<n>We derive an evidence-bound typed loop contract and instantiate its mechanically enforceable subset in a reference implementation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-07-27T16:05:23Z) - CRANE: Knowledge Editing for Reasoning MLLMs [37.084419383244814]
multimodal large language models (MLLMs) generate explicit chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning before producing answers.<n>On reasoning MLLMs, methods that generalize (FT, LoRA) trigger format collapse, while methods without deep modification cannot generalize.<n>We propose CRANE, a retrieval-augmented framework that requires no per-edit parameter modification.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-08T05:01:11Z) - Distributional Energy-Based Models for Uncertainty-Aware Structured LLM Reasoning [40.342912574072024]
Large Language Models produce structured outputs such as travel plans or code solutions.<n>Individual reasoning steps may appear correct while the output as a whole violates budgets, fails test cases, or contradicts earlier deductions.<n>We propose a learned quality scorer with deterministic analytical constraint penalties for verifying structured LLM outputs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-15T17:08:27Z)
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.