analiza aiqbench
The paper proposes a way to check whether an LLM cascade's routing decisions relied only on information it was legitimately allowed to see, not just whether the final answer and resource totals look correct. Its reported detection rates come from its own evaluations, so readers should treat them as preliminary until independent replication. For practitioners running budgeted multi-model systems, the main point is that aggregate metrics can hide invalid execution paths, and that call-ordering and hidden-read checks may be needed to audit them.
CascadeLedger: Counterfactual Auditing of Information and Resource Integrity in LLM Cascades
arXiv:2610.20668v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We introduce CascadeLedger, a counterfactual execution-audit framework for budgeted language-model cascades. The protocol enforces call-before-read semantics, binds successful reads to service and cache identities, records availability and component-wise budget transitions, and freezes the event trace before any target or task scorer is joined. The central object is aggregate-equivalent trace validity: two executions can share a final answer, declared resource projection, and service histogram while differing in whether their routing decisions used only legitimately observable information. We complement single-trace invariants with counterfactual prefix non-interference (CPNI), which couples a visible prefix and policy randomness while changing only a declared hidden family. The counterfactual influence frontier (CIF) localizes the earliest violating prefix and a minimal hidden witness; projection-preserving adversarial mutation (PPAM) searches for invalid traces that remain acceptable to a non-counterfactual checker. Across frozen-cache, independently generated, and serving evaluations, the two-layer audit reports a clean false-positive rate of 0.0000, detects 0.9983 of serialized faults and 0.9982 of unlogged hidden-read faults, and changes 0.3403 of corrupted quality-resource conclusions after deterministic recomputation. The online recorder and offline CPNI audit have separate overhead measurements. Learned routing and semantic verification provide downstream compatibility studies under the same execution contract.
Abstract:We introduce CascadeLedger, a counterfactual execution-audit framework for budgeted language-model cascades. The protocol enforces call-before-read semantics, binds successful reads to service and cache identities, records availability and component-wise budget transitions, and freezes the event trace before any target or task scorer is joined. The central object is aggregate-equivalent trace validity: two executions can share a final answer, declared resource projection, and service histogram while differing in whether their routing decisions used only legitimately observable information. We complement single-trace invariants with counterfactual prefix non-interference (CPNI), which couples a visible prefix and policy randomness while changing only a declared hidden family. The counterfactual influence frontier (CIF) localizes the earliest violating prefix and a minimal hidden witness; projection-preserving adversarial mutation (PPAM) searches for invalid traces that remain acceptable to a non-counterfactual checker. Across frozen-cache, independently generated, and serving evaluations, the two-layer audit reports a clean false-positive rate of 0.0000, detects 0.9983 of serialized faults and 0.9982 of unlogged hidden-read faults, and changes 0.3403 of corrupted quality-resource conclusions after deterministic recomputation. The online recorder and offline CPNI audit have separate overhead measurements. Learned routing and semantic verification provide downstream compatibility studies under the same execution contract.
Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2610.20668 [cs.CR]
(or arXiv:2610.20668v1 [cs.CR] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.20668 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 294 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
Assessing Information Ecosystems : How Governments Can Get Ahead of Hybrid Threats
carnegieendowment.org · 5 aug. 2026

Import AI 473: The US’s superintelligence strategy; human brain in a mouse skull; and machine hermeneutics
Import AI · 21 sept. 2026

AgentOps: Operationalize agentic AI at scale with Amazon Bedrock AgentCore
AWS · 1 iun. 2026

Article: Governing AI in the Cloud: A Practical Guide for Architects
InfoQ · 15 iun. 2026