#01Oct 22, 2026
cs.LG
CRANE: Post-Hoc Counterfactual Retrieval for Multimodal Classifiers
Franco Rugolon, Ioanna Miliou, Panagiotis Papapetrou
Counterfactual explanation methods have been introduced for unimodal settings, with dedicated frameworks for tabular, timeseries, text, and image data, yet no post-hoc method has been designed for classifiers that learn from multimodal inputs. Existing explainability methods for multimodal classifiers apply modality-specific attribution independently to each input, which fails to yield coherent explanations and does not transfer to arbitrary pre-trained multimodal architectures. To address these shortcomings, we present CRANE (Counterfactual Retrieval via Agnostic Nearest-neighbour Explanations), the first post-hoc, model-agnostic framework for nearest-neighbour multimodal counterfactual generation that retrieves real training examples from the target class as candidate explanations, ensuring plausibility by construction. Across four heterogeneous datasets and three fusion strategies, we show that Multimodal Consensus Retrieval (MC-R), which intersects per-modality neighbour sets to identify instances jointly close to the query in every modality, emerges as the strongest multimodal strategy, achieving the best or joint-best outcome on three of four datasets while grounding every explanation in the joint training distribution. Unimodal strategies remain competitive when a single modality dominates the decision boundary.
#02Oct 22, 2026
stat.ML
Reliable AI-Assisted Decisions via Selective Auditing
Isaac Gibbs, Elise L. Han, Ryan J. Tibshirani and 1 more
We consider online monitoring of an AI system that produces a sequence of decisions. At each round, the system outputs a proposed decision together with a confidence score estimating the trustworthiness of the decision. The decision and confidence score need not be produced by the same model: for example, one agent may propose a decision, while a separate verifier agent evaluates it and outputs a correctness or safety score. Based on this information, we must decide whether to accept the AI decision automatically or consult an expert, such as a human auditor, who reviews the proposal and either accepts or corrects it. We formulate this task as an online constrained optimization problem in which the goal is to minimize the frequency of expert auditing while guaranteeing that the fraction of AI errors that go unaudited stays below a user-defined threshold. We derive a family of algorithms with provable error-control guarantees with no assumptions, including a method that is optimally efficient: it asymptotically attains the best achievable auditing rate for both adversarial and i.i.d. data streams. Experiments on screening harmful requests to large language models, qualitative text annotation, and data labeling show that our methods achieve valid error control in practice while substantially reducing the need for human auditing compared to baselines.
#03Oct 22, 2026
cs.LG
METTA: Memory-Enhanced Test-Time Adaptation for Meta-Reinforcement Learning
Ali Najar, Hosein Hasani, Amir Kooshan Fattah and 2 more
Meta-reinforcement learning aims to train agents that adapt quickly to unseen tasks from limited interaction, but this requires representing task evidence over long interaction histories. Classical recurrent agents compress experience into hidden states, while transformer-based agents retrieve from past trajectories at quadratic memory and computation cost. In this work, we propose Memory-Enhanced Test-Time Adaptation (METTA) for meta-reinforcement learning. It decomposes the fast adaptation phase into two temporal scales: a causal neural memory performs fine-grained within-episode adaptation with linear sequence complexity, while compact episode-level summaries support long-range cross-episode task inference without attending over the full interaction history. Moreover, equipping agents with neural memory provides sufficient expressive capacity and test-time training capability, enabling effective adaptation to unseen held-out tasks and task families at meta-test time. On unseen held-out Meta-World ML10/45 test environments, METTA achieves a success rate over $50\%$ while maintaining a low training budget and short wall-clock time. On long-context sparse-reward PointMaze tasks, it outperforms transformer-based baselines by exhibiting more structured exploration behavior. These results show that METTA provides an efficient path toward more adaptive and scalable long-context meta-RL.
#04Oct 22, 2026
cs.LG
Questioning Instrumental Convergence in RLVR: Checkpoint Evidence from OLMo-3
Barış Alparslan, Sandy Tanwisuth, Caleb Petterson
Instrumental convergence is often invoked as a general reason to expect capable agents to acquire or express power-seeking subgoals: self-preservation, resource acquisition, deception, or resistance to oversight which poses an important threat to the society. For LLMs, reinforcement learning is the first stage of post-training that directly optimizes behavior against an objective; therefore, it is the stage where convergent instrumental behavior, on IC grounds, likely to appear. Does reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) make a model more likely to express instrumental-convergence behavior, or does this depend on the training regime, evaluation frame, and stage of post-training? We study this question as a checkpoint-conditioned behavioral trajectory rather than as a single before/after safety score. Using InstrumentalEval, we evaluate OLMo-3-7B-Think across SFT, DPO, 13 intermediate RLVR checkpoints, and the final RLVR model. The trajectory is nonmonotonic: instrumental rate rises from 25.0% at SFT to 46.1% near RLVR step 200, then falls to 11.8% at the final checkpoint. Paired item-level tests and step-wise regression support the final SFT-to-RLVR reduction. Prompt framing does not explain this pattern: a harmful-prompt indicator combined with other framing effects explains only 15% of within-checkpoint score variance on average, and Iterative Null-space Projection (INLP) removes a detectable framing direction without changing the SFT-to-final-RLVR gap. Together with preliminary 32B endpoint results (35.53% SFT to 22.37% RLVR final), these findings indicate that RLVR does not monotonically increase instrumental behavior in this setting: the rate rises early, then falls below the SFT baseline. The result is specific to this model family and benchmark, and judge agreement is moderate, so absolute rates should be read cautiously.
#05Oct 22, 2026
cs.CL
How Ground Truth Shapes Retrieval Scores: Evidence-Aware Evaluation of a Retrieval-Augmented Generation System for Breast Lesions
Miguel Mochizuki Silva, Samuel Ismael, Mateus C. Dias and 3 more
Purpose: To describe an evidence-aware retrieval evaluation protocol for a clinical retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) system over breast lesion management literature, addressing the dependence of retrieval scores on annotation coverage. Methods: An 18-document corpus and an 18-query development benchmark, with one Yes/No or WH-question per document, were used. Retrieval combined dense embeddings, BM25, and cross-encoder reranking. Chunk sizes of 128 to 1024 tokens, overlaps of 0 to 20%, and four retriever configurations were evaluated. Relevance was defined by evidence spans mapped to all containing chunks, treating overlapping chunks with equivalent evidence as relevant. Retrieval was evaluated using R-Precision, Recall@K, MRR, and nDCG@K. Separately, generation was assessed on a 512-token index at K=1 to 5 using DeepEval claim-level metrics, with deepseek-v4-pro as the LLM judge, and BLEU/ROUGE metrics. Results: The selected hybrid retriever, using 384-token chunks and 20% overlap, retrieved accepted evidence in the top three results for 17 of 18 queries. Recall@3, R-Precision, MRR@3, and nDCG@3 each reached 0.94. Ground-truth curation increased evidence spans from 25 to 37 and accepted chunk targets from 36 to 51 without changing retrieval rankings. Conclusion: Cross-encoder reranking achieved the highest retrieval scores. Expanded relevance annotations increased recognized evidence without changing rankings, highlighting annotation sensitivity. The small development set and retrieval-informed curation require independent validation, including radiologist assessment of evidence sufficiency.