SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2607.12985

Resist and Update: Counterfactual Report Coordinates for Incentive-Compatible LLMs

Abstract

Aligned language models routinely misreport under non-evidential pressure: they cave to a confident user, yet fail to revise when genuine evidence arrives. We cast this as a failure of internal incentive-compatibility and study the two demands, resist (ignore forbidden pressure) and update (follow licensed evidence), on a Bayesian-witness benchmark with known posteriors, where the same user disagreement is evidence or pressure purely by stated source reliability, removing the evidence/pressure confound by construction. Using interchange interventions rather than probes, we causally localize low-rank report coordinates for answer, confidence, and caveat, establishing causal sufficiency at a late intervention site rather than uniqueness or necessity, with a causal cross-talk matrix showing strong own-coordinate control and only small cross-effects (partial functional disentanglement). We then introduce a training-free counterfactual report-coordinate (CRC) clamp that references the model's own report under an incentive-neutralized counterfactual of the prompt. The two-pass full-window clamp attains resist and update of $1.00$ jointly (Wilson 95% CI $[0.99,1.00]$; the rank-16 projection alone reaches $0.88/0.90$), which we read as a causal certificate and upper bound under a constructible reference, not a claim of a deployed solution. Tested global decoding and fixed-direction steering trade one objective against the other, and resist-only training collapses updating to $0.01$. The deployable single-pass compilation is lossy ($0.73/0.97$). The mechanism and the clamp reproduce across three model families and transfer to a natural sycophancy benchmark with significant paired improvements. Our contribution is the interface and certification method: activation-level counterfactual incentive-invariance as a structural primitive for internal incentive-compatibility.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Sen Yang, Yuen-Hei Yeung. 2026-07-14. Resist and Update: Counterfactual Report Coordinates for Incentive-Compatible LLMs. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.12985

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI