Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This research addresses the critical gap in Large Language Model reliability by introducing VERDICT, an agent that enforces accountability through formal logic solvers rather than relying solely on probabilistic generation. By translating clinical trial matching tasks into Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT), the system guarantees policy consistency and produces verifiable rationales grounded in explicit assumptions, directly tackling issues of ungrounded or inconsistent decision-making. This approach represents a significant step toward trustworthy AI deployment in high-stakes domains like healthcare where explainability is non-negotiable.
Sources coveringarXiv, LessWrong, AI Alignment Forum, Quantum Zeitgeist
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Accountable AI with Grounded, Faithful, Consistent, Actionable Rationales: A Case Study in Clinical Trial Matching with VERDICT

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2609.03366v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Accountability means a decision can be examined, justified, and contested. LLMs make this hard: fluent output may be ungrounded, incomplete, or unfaithful to the decision process. Achieving accountability requires verified rationales (how was the decision reached), assumptions (what was assumed rather than known), policy consistency (the same treatment for the same facts), and pivotal conditions (what would change the outcome). We introduce self-faithfulness as an automatic test of accountability: changing the pivotal conditions should change the decision. We examine accountable AI through clinical trial matching, a high-stakes task central to evidence-based medicine. Although LLM-based matchers match patients to trials reasonably accurately, they apply decision policies inconsistently and produce rationales that are unfaithful to their own decisions. We introduce VERDICT, an LLM-based agent that translates a decision task, its constraints, and its policy into Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT), then derives the decision with SMT and MaxSMT solvers -- so policies are applied consistently and decisions are accountable by construction. Across a SIGIR 2016-derived dataset and TREC 2021, VERDICT achieves the strongest decision accuracy among LLM-only and neurosymbolic baselines, applies policies with perfect consistency, and produces clinician-preferred rationales grounded in explicit assumptions and pivotal conditions, with improved counterfactual self-faithfulness.

Abstract:Accountability means a decision can be examined, justified, and contested. LLMs make this hard: fluent output may be ungrounded, incomplete, or unfaithful to the decision process. Achieving accountability requires verified rationales (how was the decision reached), assumptions (what was assumed rather than known), policy consistency (the same treatment for the same facts), and pivotal conditions (what would change the outcome). We introduce self-faithfulness as an automatic test of accountability: changing the pivotal conditions should change the decision. We examine accountable AI through clinical trial matching, a high-stakes task central to evidence-based medicine. Although LLM-based matchers match patients to trials reasonably accurately, they apply decision policies inconsistently and produce rationales that are unfaithful to their own decisions. We introduce VERDICT, an LLM-based agent that translates a decision task, its constraints, and its policy into Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT), then derives the decision with SMT and MaxSMT solvers -- so policies are applied consistently and decisions are accountable by construction. Across a SIGIR 2016-derived dataset and TREC 2021, VERDICT achieves the strongest decision accuracy among LLM-only and neurosymbolic baselines, applies policies with perfect consistency, and produces clinician-preferred rationales grounded in explicit assumptions and pivotal conditions, with improved counterfactual self-faithfulness.

Accepted to EMNLP 2026 (Main Conference). 46 pages, 6 figures, 28 tables. Code and prompts: this https URL

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Computers and Society (cs.CY); Logic in Computer Science (cs.LO)

I.2.7; I.2.4; J.3

arXiv:2609.03366 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2609.03366v1 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.03366 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 322 words

Related coverage