arXiv preprint ·
Benchmarking candidate coverage and rejection policy transfer in typed decision models
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Rejection policies must remain useful as candidate sets and tasks change. We compare Laya, Jev and Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct using public reference labels, testing Laya/Jev policy transfer at equal calibration budgets and all three models on artificial omission, natural retrieval misses and public out-of-scope queries. Source calibration often fails to preserve the target operating point. A Jev policy calibrated on DBpedia rejects 69.3% of covered Emotion test inputs, while an Emotion policy loses detection entirely. Retrieval exposes a different tradeoff: with ten intent candidates, Laya detects 99.0% of out-of-scope queries but rejects 48.8% of covered queries. Separating missing-answer sources reveals these costs alongside retrieval coverage. The benchmark provides shared inputs, explicit decision and failure categories, and reproducible scoring to assess rejection policies under the conditions in which they are reused. Code and benchmark artifacts are available at https://github.com/luckykevvv/Decision_Model_Benchmark.
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.
More in Artificial Intelligence
Learning When to Commit from Partial Speech for End-to-End Simultaneous Speech Translation
Principled Top-$k$ Selection for Language Models with Hybrid Gradients
VERSE: Verified Self-Evolving Optimizer for Agent Harnesses
DimSteer: Steering LLM Authoring with Automatically Discovered Stylistic Controls
Large Language Continuous Diffusion Models
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.