Abstract:As humans increasingly rely on multiround conversational AI for high stakes decisions, principled frameworks are needed to ensure such interactions reliably improve decision quality. We adopt a human centric view governed by two principles: counterfactual harm, ensuring the AI does not undermine human strengths, and complementarity, ensuring it adds value where the human is prone to err. We formalize these concepts via user defined rules, allowing users to specify exactly what harm and complementarity mean for their specific task. We then introduce an online, distribution free algorithm with finite sample guarantees that enforces the user-specified constraints over the collaboration dynamics. We evaluate our framework across two interactive settings: LLM simulated collaboration on a medical diagnostic task and a human crowdsourcing study on a pictorial reasoning task. We show that our online procedure maintains prescribed counterfactual harm and complementarity violation rates even under nonstationary interaction dynamics. Moreover, tightening or loosening these constraints produces predictable shifts in downstream human accuracy, confirming that the two principles serve as practical levers for steering multi-round collaboration toward better decision quality without the need to model or constrain human behavior.
Abstract:Reasoning with LLMs increasingly unfolds inside a broader verification loop. Internally, systems use cheap checks, such as self-consistency or proxy rewards, which we call weak verification. Externally, users inspect outputs and steer the model through feedback until results are trustworthy, which we call strong verification. These signals differ sharply in cost and reliability: strong verification can establish trust but is resource-intensive, while weak verification is fast and scalable but noisy and imperfect. We formalize this tension through weak--strong verification policies, which decide when to accept or reject based on weak verification and when to defer to strong verification. We introduce metrics capturing incorrect acceptance, incorrect rejection, and strong-verification frequency. Over population, we show that optimal policies admit a two-threshold structure and that calibration and sharpness govern the value of weak verifiers. Building on this, we develop an online algorithm that provably controls acceptance and rejection errors without assumptions on the query stream, the language model, or the weak verifier.




Abstract:Uncertainty quantification (UQ) is essential for safe deployment of generative AI models such as large language models (LLMs), especially in high stakes applications. Conformal prediction (CP) offers a principled uncertainty quantification framework, but classical methods focus on regression and classification, relying on geometric distances or softmax scores: tools that presuppose structured outputs. We depart from this paradigm by studying CP in a query only setting, where prediction sets must be constructed solely from finite queries to a black box generative model, introducing a new trade off between coverage, test time query budget, and informativeness. We introduce Conformal Prediction with Query Oracle (CPQ), a framework characterizing the optimal interplay between these objectives. Our finite sample algorithm is built on two core principles: one governs the optimal query policy, and the other defines the optimal mapping from queried samples to prediction sets. Remarkably, both are rooted in the classical missing mass problem in statistics. Specifically, the optimal query policy depends on the rate of decay, or the derivative, of the missing mass, for which we develop a novel estimator. Meanwhile, the optimal mapping hinges on the missing mass itself, which we estimate using Good Turing estimators. We then turn our focus to implementing our method for language models, where outputs are vast, variable, and often under specified. Fine grained experiments on three real world open ended tasks and two LLMs, show CPQ applicability to any black box LLM and highlight: (1) individual contribution of each principle to CPQ performance, and (2) CPQ ability to yield significantly more informative prediction sets than existing conformal methods for language uncertainty quantification.




Abstract:Conformal prediction (CP) is a distribution-free framework for achieving probabilistic guarantees on black-box models. CP is generally applied to a model post-training. Recent research efforts, on the other hand, have focused on optimizing CP efficiency during training. We formalize this concept as the problem of conformal risk minimization (CRM). In this direction, conformal training (ConfTr) by Stutz et al.(2022) is a technique that seeks to minimize the expected prediction set size of a model by simulating CP in-between training updates. Despite its potential, we identify a strong source of sample inefficiency in ConfTr that leads to overly noisy estimated gradients, introducing training instability and limiting practical use. To address this challenge, we propose variance-reduced conformal training (VR-ConfTr), a CRM method that incorporates a variance reduction technique in the gradient estimation of the ConfTr objective function. Through extensive experiments on various benchmark datasets, we demonstrate that VR-ConfTr consistently achieves faster convergence and smaller prediction sets compared to baselines.