CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◬ AI & Machine Learning May 28, 2026

Auditable Decision Models with Learned Abstention and Real-Time Steering

arXiv AI Archived May 28, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2605.27768v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Production AI systems often operate with incomplete, conflicting, or insufficient evidence. Forced classifiers collapse such cases into action labels, while generative systems can produce outputs that are difficult to interpret as auditable execution decisions. We study operational decision control for AI systems, where uncertainty must be explicitly routable, policy-governed, and auditable rather than hidden inside forced predictions or free-form

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence [Submitted on 26 May 2026] Auditable Decision Models with Learned Abstention and Real-Time Steering Sankaranarayanan Palamadai Chandrasekaran Production AI systems often operate with incomplete, conflicting, or insufficient evidence. Forced classifiers collapse such cases into action labels, while generative systems can produce outputs that are difficult to interpret as auditable execution decisions. We study operational decision control for AI systems, where uncertainty must be explicitly routable, policy-governed, and auditable rather than hidden inside forced predictions or free-form generation. We present EvaluatorDPT, a bounded decision-control model that predicts YES, NO, or TBD, where TBD is learned as a deferral outcome rather than added only as a post-hoc confidence rule. The model uses a transformer encoder with a primary bounded-decision head and structured auxiliary channels for values and emotions/sentiments. The interface is domain-agnostic in form: a deployment domain supplies evidence and policy thresholds, while the model emits a bounded distribution that can be controlled at inference time through recorded operating thresholds and, when validated, auxiliary semantic signals. For the evaluated model version, we report decision performance on held-out validation and test splits; auxiliary emotion metrics are omitted because the emotion head is disabled for this evaluation. On the held-out test split (n=44,597), the model achieves Accuracy = 0.8260 and Macro F1 = 0.8252, with per-class F1 of 0.8314 (YES), 0.8486 (NO), and 0.7956 (TBD). The evaluation record also includes calibration evidence (ECE = 0.0338 on validation), threshold-sweep outputs, multi-seed stability checks, confusion matrices, and reproducibility commands. Our main contribution is a bounded execution interface in which deferral is learned, inference-time routing remains inspectable, auxiliary signals provide a path to auditable behavior control, and evaluation evidence supports external review. Comments: 21 pages, 5 figures Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) Cite as: arXiv:2605.27768 [cs.AI]   (or arXiv:2605.27768v1 [cs.AI] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.27768 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Sankaranarayanan Palamadai Chandrasekaran [view email] [v1] Tue, 26 May 2026 23:37:56 UTC (336 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: cs.AI < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-05 Change to browse by: cs 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
    May 28, 2026
    Archived
    May 28, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗