analiza aiqbench
EviGraph introduces a language agent coupled with a deterministic checker to navigate temporal knowledge graphs, distinguishing between critical decision requirements and non-essential information in public-service contexts. This approach reduces unnecessary abstention rates by allowing the system to proceed when evidence for specific details is unresolved, provided those details are not decisive for the outcome. The study highlights that reliability in AI-driven navigation depends on defining necessary proof rather than indiscriminately increasing verification steps.
EviGraph: Proof-Carrying Selective Recommendation over Temporal Public-Service Knowledge Graphs
arXiv:2610.00212v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Public-service recommendations require evidence that matches the requested service, scope, and date. Yet treating every missing detail as decisive can withhold useful recommendations. We introduce EviGraph, which distinguishes critical decision requirements from information that can remain unresolved. A language agent links these requirements to evidence in a temporal knowledge graph, while a deterministic checker establishes whether a recommendation is supported. Evaluation on a bilingual Hong Kong public-service benchmark with executable policy references shows that this distinction reduces unnecessary abstention. Additional verification, however, can withdraw supported recommendations without improving decision quality. These findings suggest that reliable evidence-based navigation depends on specifying what must be established for a decision, rather than simply adding more verification.
Abstract:Public-service recommendations require evidence that matches the requested service, scope, and date. Yet treating every missing detail as decisive can withhold useful recommendations. We introduce EviGraph, which distinguishes critical decision requirements from information that can remain unresolved. A language agent links these requirements to evidence in a temporal knowledge graph, while a deterministic checker establishes whether a recommendation is supported. Evaluation on a bilingual Hong Kong public-service benchmark with executable policy references shows that this distinction reduces unnecessary abstention. Additional verification, however, can withdraw supported recommendations without improving decision quality. These findings suggest that reliable evidence-based navigation depends on specifying what must be established for a decision, rather than simply adding more verification.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.00212 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2610.00212v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.00212 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 · 207 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Lattice-Based Cryptography Explained
Quantum Zeitgeist · 15 aug. 2026

Post-Quantum Cryptography Explained, the Complete Plain English Guide
Quantum Zeitgeist · 30 aug. 2026

[AINews] The Future of Latent Space
Latent Space · 25 sept. 2026

[AINews] Opus 5.5 is good at explainer videos
Latent Space · 29 sept. 2026