arXiv (All)
open access
When Can You Trust an Agent's Own Verifier? Stress-Testing Counterfactual Rationale Verification Under Search Pressure and Oracle Access
Automated agent design increasingly trusts a single score to decide whether a change is an improvement -- but a score optimized aggressively enough ceases to measure what it was meant to. When an agent also explains its design, that explanation is a second signal we can check without human labels: n
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
- MAS-ProVe: Understanding the Process Verification of Multi-Agent Systems#819295
- MAS-ProVe: Understanding the Process Verification of Multi-Agent Systems#809302
- AlphaDiana: A Measurement System for Agents in Verifiable Reasoning Tasks#1355664
- The Calibration Trap: Why Epistemic Self-Assessment Is Coherent but Unverifiable from the Inside#688981
- Prediction certification cannot replace explanation certification: a competence envelope for trustworthy AI under compound stress#659369
Record · ID 1386749
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