arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.09693

A Tale of Two Error Categories: Exploring Concealed Trade-Offs in the Errors of Automated Judges in Evaluation of Uncertainty Quantifiers

Evgenia Ilia·Wilker Aziz
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The wide adoption of LLMs across broad NLG applications heightens the importance of providing users with the means to avert errors and hallucinations. Uncertainty quantification is poised to fill that gap; with low uncertainty (high confidence), as a proxy for correctness, allowing users to be selective (e.g., reject low-confidence, likely incorrect responses). Correlation between confidence and correctness then serves as a useful criterion for evaluation of uncertainty quantifiers (UQs). But in NLG, where diverse responses can be adequate to a prompt, obtaining reliable correctness judgements is not simple, especially without human intervention. Errors in automated judgement are hardly avoidable and known to diminish the reliability of evaluation protocols (Santilli et al., 2025; Ielanskyi et al., 2025). In a meta-analysis of published work, we show that automated judgement is the present norm. Besides, automated judgements are rarely validated against human ones, and the validation of the UQ evaluation they automate is even rarer. With experiments in question answering, using 4 LLMs, human and automated judgements and 7 popular UQs, we find that i) a judge's performance can only coarsely predict the observed impact of its errors on the reliability of UQ evaluation, and that ii) judgement errors tend to misrepresent informative UQs most. We link these observations to patterns of correlation between confidence and categories of judgement error.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Evgenia Ilia, Wilker Aziz. 2026-10-07. A Tale of Two Error Categories: Exploring Concealed Trade-Offs in the Errors of Automated Judges in Evaluation of Uncertainty Quantifiers. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.09693

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

FREIDA: A Framework for developing quantitative agent based models based on qualitative expert knowledge

Agent Based Models (ABMs) often deal with systems where there is a lack of quantitative data or where quantitative data alone may be insufficient to fully capture the complexities of real-world systems. Expert knowledge and qualitative insights, such as those obtained through interviews, ethnographic research, historical accounts, or participatory workshops, are critical in constructing realistic behavioral rules, interactions, and decision-making processes within these models. However, there is a scarcity of systematic approaches that are able to incorporate both qualitative and quantitative data across the entire modeling cycle. To address this, we propose FREIDA, a systematic mixed-methods framework to develop, train, and validate ABMs, particularly in data-sparse contexts. The main technical innovation introduced within this framework is the extraction of what we call Expected System Behaviors (ESBs) from qualitative data, which are testable statements evaluated through model simulations. Divided into Calibration Statements (CS) for model calibration and Validation Statements (VS) for model validation, ESBs underpin a rigorous evaluation mechanism on the same footing as quantitative data. By structuring qualitative insights as explicit model constraints, FREIDA creates a transparent foundation for applying established modelling practices such as Sensitivity Analysis (SA) and Uncertainty Quantification (UQ), allowing modellers to assess parameter influence, model robustness, and remaining uncertainties in a systematic manner. Through this, qualitative insights can inform not only model specification but also parameterization, validation, and continuous improvement of model reliability and fitness for purpose, addressing a long-standing challenge in agent-based modeling. We illustrate the application of FREIDA through a case study of criminal cocaine networks in the Netherlands.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Requirement-Based Testing: Enhancing Reinforcement Learning with Game Theory

We consider the automatic online synthesis of black-box test cases from functional requirements specified as automata for reactive implementations. The goal of the tester is to reach some given state, so as to satisfy a coverage criterion, while monitoring the violation of the requirements. We develop an approach based on Monte Carlo Tree Search, which is a classical technique in reinforcement learning for efficiently selecting promising inputs. Seeing the automata requirements as a game between the implementation and the tester, we develop a heuristic by biasing the search towards inputs that are promising in this game. We experimentally show that our heuristic accelerates the convergence of the Monte Carlo Tree Search algorithm, thus improving the performance of testing.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Towards Explainable Conversational AI for Early Diagnosis with Large Language Models

Healthcare systems around the world are grappling with issues such as inefficient diagnostics, rising costs, and limited access to specialists. These challenges often contribute to delays in treatment and poorer health outcomes. Most existing AI and deep learning based health assessment systems offer limited interactivity and transparency, reducing their usefulness for user-centered health support. This research introduces a conversational chatbot powered by a Large Language Model (LLM), using GPT-4o, Retrieval-Augmented Generation, and explainable AI techniques. The chatbot engages users in a dynamic conversation to extract and normalize symptoms while identifying and ranking potential health conditions through similarity matching and adaptive questioning. Using Chain-of-Thought prompting, the system also provides more transparent explanations of its reasoning process. When evaluated against traditional machine learning models, including Naive Bayes, Logistic Regression, SVM, Random Forest, and KNN using both TF-IDF and CountVectorizer feature extraction, the proposed LLM-based system achieved a Top-1 accuracy of 90% and a Top-3 accuracy of 100%. The system was additionally evaluated through a cross-sectional expert evaluation involving 17 physicians across all 14 conditions, with the results indicating generally favorable assessments of conversational quality, early diagnostic plausibility, and safety-related criteria. These findings demonstrate the potential of explainable conversational AI as a health and well-being support tool for early symptom assessment. However, the proposed system is not intended for clinical diagnosis or clinical decision-making, and further validation would be required before any use in healthcare practice.

cs.AI↗