arXiv preprint ·

Laya as a Typed Probabilistic Assessor: An Independent Reproduction and a Preregistered Study of Calibration and Selective Escalation

Gowthamkumar Nandakishore

Published
Source
arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
Original
Read it at arXiv
Topics
Artificial IntelligenceComputation & Language / NLPMachine Learning

Abstract

The shipped Laya Typed-Decisions checkpoint, a 421M-parameter ModernBERT-large assessor that answers typed choice/noul/score questions over workflow state, is uniformly under-confident. The signed confidence-accuracy gap is $-0.214$, every occupied reliability bin's accuracy exceeds its confidence, and that sign uniformity collapses every binned ECE variant to the same value, $0.214$. The card frames the risk as over-confidence; the measured direction is the opposite, and the direction decides which way a confidence-gated cascade fails. A single disjointly fitted temperature ($T=0.469$, sharpening) removes most of the miscalibration (held-out ECE $0.204$ to $0.037$) and outperforms the shipped per-option-count table. The frozen selection rule instead chose isotonic regression, which overfit and failed its held-out NLL contrast on both tracks, so hypothesis H2 is not supported. Re-running the released checkpoint on its full official test split reproduces the card's headline accuracy ($0.767$ vs. $0.766$). The retrospective E1 reproduction preceded the analysis freeze; E2-E8 were prospectively preregistered, and 20 of 22 executed confirmatory tests reject under Benjamini-Hochberg FDR at $q=0.05$ (two descoped). The frozen gate beats random escalation but misses its 10% accepted-set error target on both tracks, an exploratory out-of-distribution probe finds no zero-shot transfer (accuracy $0.617$), and every score measures agreement with a synthetic teacher whose self-agreement ceiling ($0.735$) the specialist exceeds. Per-decision predictions, run manifests, and the frozen preregistration are in the ancillary files. The author has no affiliation with the model's publisher, the dataset's publisher, or TypeSafe.

The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.

Read it on ReadSearch

Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.

Already a reader? Sign in

All new papers in Artificial Intelligence

Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence every morning.

ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.

Papers belong to their authors and publishers; every page here links to the original. All research topics