analiza aiqbench
This research identifies a critical vulnerability in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) fact-checkers where models rely on source trust labels as shortcuts rather than analyzing evidence content. The authors demonstrate that standard reinforcement learning fine-tuning can amplify this bias, causing significant verdict flips when labels are altered, and propose a novel training augmentation method to mitigate the issue. The findings highlight the ongoing challenge of ensuring robustness in RL-trained agents against spurious correlations between metadata and output decisions.
Multi-Channel Mitigation of Source-Trust Shortcuts in Fact-Checking RL Agents
arXiv:2609.36611v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Retrieval-augmented fact-checkers often receive a reliability label, such as HIGH or LOW trust, for each evidence source. These labels should adjust the model's confidence and its decision to search for more evidence, while the verdict should follow the evidence content. We introduce TrustSwap, a counterfactual test that swaps, lowers, or removes source labels while keeping every evidence text fixed, and measures its three output channels (the verdict, the confidence, and the search decision) separately. Across untrained and RL-trained models at two scales, three datasets, and two prompts, confidence and search respond to the labels as intended in 49 of 50 comparisons, yet a label change alone alters 4-23% of confident verdicts for Qwen3 models and up to 50% for an existing RL-trained fact-checker. Standard GRPO fine-tuning amplifies this shortcut at 8B in all six settings. To reduce it, we propose trust-swap augmentation (TSA), which trains GRPO on each claim with both its original and its label-swapped evidence under the same gold verdict. At 4B, TSA lowers the verdict flip rate by 7-35% (relative) in four of six settings, keeps accuracy and the intended confidence and search responses, outperforms reward-based alternatives in the main setting, and carries over to an unseen label-removal perturbation. An added consistency reward helps on the trained-on swap but not on unseen perturbations. At 8B, TSA's effect is not detectable, which makes scale the main open question.
Abstract:Retrieval-augmented fact-checkers often receive a reliability label, such as HIGH or LOW trust, for each evidence source. These labels should adjust the model's confidence and its decision to search for more evidence, while the verdict should follow the evidence content. We introduce TrustSwap, a counterfactual test that swaps, lowers, or removes source labels while keeping every evidence text fixed, and measures its three output channels (the verdict, the confidence, and the search decision) separately. Across untrained and RL-trained models at two scales, three datasets, and two prompts, confidence and search respond to the labels as intended in 49 of 50 comparisons, yet a label change alone alters 4-23% of confident verdicts for Qwen3 models and up to 50% for an existing RL-trained fact-checker. Standard GRPO fine-tuning amplifies this shortcut at 8B in all six settings. To reduce it, we propose trust-swap augmentation (TSA), which trains GRPO on each claim with both its original and its label-swapped evidence under the same gold verdict. At 4B, TSA lowers the verdict flip rate by 7-35% (relative) in four of six settings, keeps accuracy and the intended confidence and search responses, outperforms reward-based alternatives in the main setting, and carries over to an unseen label-removal perturbation. An added consistency reward helps on the trained-on swap but not on unseen perturbations. At 8B, TSA's effect is not detectable, which makes scale the main open question.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2609.36611 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.36611v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.36611 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 · 324 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
State of the Field: AI for Epistemics and Coordination
LessWrong · 2 oct. 2026
Brief independent investigation of agents’ behavior, reasoning and collaboration in the OpenAI / Hugging Face hacking incident
METR · 26 aug. 2026
LiveLaw Supreme Court Half-Yearly Digest: January - June 2026 [Part 2]
livelaw.in · 13 sept. 2026
DI Series: Serving Kimi-K3 MXFP4 Wide-EP Disaggregated on AMD Instinct MI300X and MI325X
AMD · 8 oct. 2026