Confidence Calibration in Vision-Language-Action Models

Trustworthy robot behavior requires not only high levels of task success but also that the robot can reliably quantify how likely it is to succeed. To this end, we present the first systematic study of confidence calibration in vision-language-action (VLA) foundation models, which map visual observations and natural-language instructions to low-level robot motor commands. We begin with extensive benchmarking to understand the critical relationship between task success and calibration error across multiple datasets and VLA variants, finding that task performance and calibration are not in tension. Next, we introduce prompt ensembles for VLAs, a lightweight, Bayesian-inspired algorithm that averages confidence across paraphrased instructions and consistently improves calibration. We further analyze calibration over the task time horizon, showing that confidence is often most reliable after making some progress, suggesting natural points for risk-aware intervention. Finally, we reveal differential miscalibration across action dimensions and propose action-wise Platt scaling, a method to recalibrate each action dimension independently to produce better confidence estimates. Our aim in this study is to begin to develop the tools and conceptual understanding necessary to render VLAs both highly performant and highly trustworthy via reliable uncertainty quantification.

Guiding LLM Decision-Making with Fairness Reward Models

Large language models are increasingly used to support high-stakes decisions, potentially influencing who is granted bail or receives a loan. Naive chain-of-thought sampling can improve average decision accuracy, but has also been shown to amplify unfair bias. To address this challenge and enable the trustworthy use of reasoning models in high-stakes decision-making, we propose a framework for training a generalizable Fairness Reward Model (FRM). Our model assigns a fairness score to LLM reasoning, enabling the system to down-weight biased trajectories and favor equitable ones when aggregating decisions across reasoning chains. We show that a single Fairness Reward Model, trained on weakly supervised, LLM-annotated examples of biased versus unbiased reasoning, transfers across tasks, domains, and model families without additional fine-tuning. Applied to real-world decision-making tasks including recidivism prediction and social media moderation, we show that our approach consistently improves fairness while matching, or even surpassing, baseline accuracy.