Internal Confidence beside a Wasserstein-Robust Value

Authors

  • Cole Morgan Author
  • Benjamin Lewis Author
  • Thomas Graham Author

Abstract

An internal hallucination signal and a robust Bellman value describe different uncertainties. Evaluation should preserve the event scored by the alert and the transition set protected by the value calculation. Independent workflow outcomes can connect them through actions. Neither a calibrated static alert nor fast robust optimization certifies the other mechanism automatically. This focused synthesis develops an empirical comparison that preserves the terminal action, observation process, and total verification cost. Its proposed tests are prospective; no new simulation run, model-training result, or intervention effect is reported.

References

  1. S. Chen, M. Xiong, J. Liu, Z. Wu, T. Xiao, S. Gao, and J. He, “In-Context Sharpness as Alerts: An Inner Representation Perspective for Hallucination Mitigation,” Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024.
  2. Z. Yu, L. Dai, S. Xu, S. Gao, and C. Ho, “Fast Bellman Updates for Wasserstein Distributionally Robust MDPs,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 30554–30578, 2023.
  3. Tan, Wei, Yuanhao Li, and Wenkai Liang. “Evo-CuRL: Curriculum-Aware Reinforcement Learning over Code Lineage Graphs for Software Engineering Reasoning.” Proceedings of the 2026 International Conference on Multimedia Retrieval, ACM, 2026, pp. 1327-1335. https://doi.org/10.1145/3805622.3810701.
  4. Rasmussen, Carl Edward, and Christopher K. I. Williams. Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning. MIT Press, 2006. https://gaussianprocess.org/gpml/.
  5. Hu, Edward J., et al. “LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Models.” International Conference on Learning Representations, 2022. https://openreview.net/forum?id=nZeVKeeFYf9.
  6. Guo, Chuan, Geoff Pleiss, Yu Sun, and Kilian Q. Weinberger. “On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks.” Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, vol. 70, 2017, pp. 1321–1330. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v70/guo17a.html.
  7. Sutton, Richard S., and Andrew G. Barto. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. 2nd ed., MIT Press, 2018. http://incompleteideas.net/book/the-book-2nd.html.
  8. Levine, Sergey, Aviral Kumar, George Tucker, and Justin Fu. “Offline Reinforcement Learning: Tutorial, Review, and Perspectives on Open Problems.” arXiv, 2020, arXiv:2005.01643. https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.01643.
  9. Kumar, Aviral, Aurick Zhou, George Tucker, and Sergey Levine. “Conservative Q-Learning for Offline Reinforcement Learning.” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 33, 2020, pp. 1179–1191. https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.04779.
  10. Lewis, Patrick, et al. “Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks.” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 33, 2020, pp. 9459–9474. https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.11401.
  11. Geifman, Yonatan, and Ran El-Yaniv. “Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networks.” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 30, 2017. https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.08500.

Downloads

Published

2026-10-08

Versions

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 10 (2026): October 2026

Section

Articles