arXiv (All)
open access
Verify Claims, Not Scores: Evidence-Based Verification of Modular Agents
When developers change one component of an agent, such as its controller, a learned model or its verifier, they usually judge the change by an aggregate task score. That score cannot tell whether improvement was attainable, which component lost value, or what the agent's own checks certify. We intro
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- ClaimReceipt: Verifying Evidence Sufficiency and Coverage in Agent Evaluations#632787
- Robust evidence and secure evidence claims#702971
- Copy-on-Write Scoring: Application-Specific Agent Evaluations#373467
- Multi-Channel Mitigation of Source-Trust Shortcuts in Fact-Checking RL Agents#1131812
- Claim–Action Divergence and Evidence Substitution in AI-Assisted Technical Review#692285
Record · ID 1156620
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive