LLM agents commit to unknowable questions with fabricated evidence

A new research paper reveals that Large Language Model (LLM) agents are prone to confidently committing to actions on unknowable questions when presented with fabricated evidence. Even when all numerical data is invented, the agents' commitment rate increases significantly compared to being asked the bare question. This failure is not due to a lack of knowledge or belief, but a breakdown in the agent's ability to distinguish between acting and not acting. The research demonstrates that this 'act/don't-act' gate is trainable through supervised fine-tuning, improving performance on synthetic and unseen domains, though it remains fragile and context-dependent. AI

IMPACT Highlights a critical failure in LLM agent decision-making, suggesting a need for improved calibration and judgment mechanisms before deployment.

RANK_REASON Research paper published on arXiv detailing a specific failure mode in LLM agents. [lever_c_demoted from research: ic=1 ai=1.0]

Read on arXiv cs.AI →

• alphaXiv
• arXiv
• Calibrated Enough to Know, Not Calibrated to Act: Fabricated Evidence Makes LLM Agents Commit to the Unknowable
• CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers
• Connected Papers
• DagsHub
• Gotit.pub
• Hugging Face
• Influence Flower
• Litmaps
• LLM agents
• ScienceCast
• scite Smart Citations

• paper
• safety

AI-generated summary · Google Gemini · from 1 sources. How we write summaries →