CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning Apr 23, 2026

MIRROR: A Hierarchical Benchmark for Metacognitive Calibration in Large Language Models

arXiv AI Archived Apr 23, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2604.19809v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We introduce MIRROR, a benchmark comprising eight experiments across four metacognitive levels that evaluates whether large language models can use self-knowledge to make better decisions. We evaluate 16 models from 8 labs across approximately 250,000 evaluation instances using five independent behavioral measurement channels. Core experiments are run across the full model roster; experiments with specialized infrastructure requirements report expl

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence [Submitted on 15 Apr 2026] MIRROR: A Hierarchical Benchmark for Metacognitive Calibration in Large Language Models Jason Z Wang We introduce MIRROR, a benchmark comprising eight experiments across four metacognitive levels that evaluates whether large language models can use self-knowledge to make better decisions. We evaluate 16 models from 8 labs across approximately 250,000 evaluation instances using five independent behavioral measurement channels. Core experiments are run across the full model roster; experiments with specialized infrastructure requirements report explicitly marked model subsets. We find two phenomena with direct implications for agentic deployment: (1) compositional self-prediction fails universally -- the Compositional Calibration Error ranges from 0.500 to 0.943 on the original 15-model Exp3-v1 set (and 0.434 to 0.758 on the balanced 16-model Exp3-v2 expansion), indicating that models cannot predict their own performance on multi-domain tasks, and (2) models exhibit above-chance but imperfect domain-specific self-knowledge yet systematically fail to translate even this partial awareness into appropriate agentic action-selection -- external metacognitive control reduces the Confident Failure Rate from 0.600 to 0.143 (76% reduction at temperature 0; mean 70% at temperature 0.7 across 5 models from 4 labs). Providing models with their own calibration scores produces no significant improvement (p > 0.05); only architectural constraint is effective. This suggests that external metacognitive scaffolding -- not improved self-knowledge -- is the path to safer autonomous AI systems. Code, data, and Croissant metadata will be released publicly with the benchmark. Comments: 30 pages, 6 figures,code at: this https URL Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG) Cite as: arXiv:2604.19809 [cs.AI]   (or arXiv:2604.19809v1 [cs.AI] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.19809 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Jason Z Wang [view email] [v1] Wed, 15 Apr 2026 08:41:12 UTC (166 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.AI < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-04 Change to browse by: cs cs.LG References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv AI
    Category
    ◬ AI & Machine Learning
    Published
    Apr 23, 2026
    Archived
    Apr 23, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗