aiqbench analysis
This research identifies information retrievability as a critical precondition for effective human oversight of LLMs, demonstrating that self-generated explanations and retrieval cues significantly improve error detection rates in routine organizational workflows. By shifting the focus from mere user engagement to the accessibility of verification-relevant data at the moment of review, the study offers practical mechanisms to sustain oversight resilience as AI integration deepens.
Knowing Is Not Enough: Information Retrievability as a Precondition to Effective LLM Oversight
arXiv:2609.01976v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in organizational work, yet their errors often pass human review. Prior research locates such failures in users' capability to review LLM output or their engagement in doing so. We develop an alternative, retrieval-based account of human oversight and posit that error detection is more effective when oversight-relevant information is accessible to users at the moment of review. Across two randomized lab-in-the-field experiments with 640 customer-facing employees, we show that self-generated explanations improve error detection and strengthen recall of verification-relevant reasoning, while cues that reactivate such reasoning help sustain detection under repeated LLM use. Theoretically, we identify information retrievability as a distinct precondition for effective oversight and specify generative encoding and cue-supported reactivation as mechanisms that build and sustain it. Practically, lightweight onboarding self-explanations and daily retrieval cues can make human oversight more resilient as LLM use becomes routine.
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in organizational work, yet their errors often pass human review. Prior research locates such failures in users' capability to review LLM output or their engagement in doing so. We develop an alternative, retrieval-based account of human oversight and posit that error detection is more effective when oversight-relevant information is accessible to users at the moment of review. Across two randomized lab-in-the-field experiments with 640 customer-facing employees, we show that self-generated explanations improve error detection and strengthen recall of verification-relevant reasoning, while cues that reactivate such reasoning help sustain detection under repeated LLM use. Theoretically, we identify information retrievability as a distinct precondition for effective oversight and specify generative encoding and cue-supported reactivation as mechanisms that build and sustain it. Practically, lightweight onboarding self-explanations and daily retrieval cues can make human oversight more resilient as LLM use becomes routine.
Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2609.01976 [cs.HC]
(or arXiv:2609.01976v1 [cs.HC] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.01976 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 · 242 words
Related coverage
Fable and Mythos: Model Welfare
LessWrong · Jun 16, 2026
If This Were a Test, How Much Would It Cost?
LessWrong · Jun 16, 2026

Research Note: Filtering Subversion-Relevant Information From Pretraining Data Is Feasible
LessWrong · Oct 5, 2026

Why I Left Google DeepMind
LessWrong · Jul 15, 2026