Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2403.16393

Concurrent Linguistic Error Detection (CLED): a New Methodology for Error Detection in Large Language Models

Abstract

The wide adoption of Large language models (LLMs) makes their dependability a pressing concern. Detection of errors is the first step to mitigating their impact on a system and thus, efficient error detection for LLMs is an important issue. In many settings, the LLM is considered as a black box with no access to the internal nodes; this prevents the use of many error detection schemes that need access to the model's internal nodes. An interesting observation is that the output of LLMs in error-free operation should be valid and normal text. Therefore, when the text is not valid or differs significantly from normal text, it is likely that there is an error. Based on this observation we propose to perform Concurrent Linguistic Error Detection (CLED); this scheme extracts some linguistic features of the text generated by the LLM and feeds them to a concurrent classifier that detects errors. Since the proposed error detection mechanism only relies on the outputs of the model, then it can be used on LLMs in which there is no access to the internal nodes. The proposed CLED scheme has been evaluated on the T5 model when used for news summarization and on the OPUS-MT model when used for translation. In both cases, the same set of linguistic features has been used for error detection to illustrate the applicability of the proposed scheme beyond a specific case. The results show that CLED can detect most of the errors at a low overhead penalty. The use of the concurrent classifier also enables a trade-off between error detection effectiveness and its associated overhead, so providing flexibility to a designer.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jinhua Zhu, Javier Conde, Zhen Gao, Pedro Reviriego, Shanshan Liu, Fabrizio Lombardi. 2025-09-15. Concurrent Linguistic Error Detection (CLED): a New Methodology for Error Detection in Large Language Models. https://doi.org/10.1109/tc.2025.3603682

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Memory-Free Continual Learning with Null Space Adaptation for Zero-Shot Vision-Language Models

Pre-trained vision-language models (VLMs), such as CLIP, have demonstrated remarkable zero-shot generalization, enabling deployment in a wide range of real-world tasks without additional task-specific training. However, in real deployment scenarios with evolving environments or emerging classes, these models inevitably face distributional shifts and novel tasks. In such contexts, static zero-shot capabilities are insufficient, and there is a growing need for continual learning methods that allow models to adapt over time while avoiding catastrophic forgetting. We introduce NuSA-CL (Null Space Adaptation for Continual Learning), a lightweight memory-free continual learning framework designed to address this challenge. NuSA-CL employs low-rank adaptation and constrains task-specific weight updates to lie within an approximate null space of the model's current parameters. This strategy minimizes interference with previously acquired knowledge, effectively preserving the zero-shot capabilities of the original model. Unlike methods relying on replay buffers or costly distillation, NuSA-CL imposes minimal computational and memory overhead, making it practical for deployment in resource-constrained, real-world continual learning environments. Experiments show that our framework not only effectively preserves zero-shot transfer capabilities but also achieves highly competitive performance on continual learning benchmarks. These results position NuSA-CL as a practical and scalable solution for continually evolving zero-shot VLMs in real-world applications.

cs.AI

VeRA: Renewing Reasoning Benchmarks with Executable Specifications

Reasoning benchmarks need renewal along two axes: freshness and headroom. VeRA makes both executable and auditable by turning each item into a task family: a natural-language template, an input generator, and a deterministic answer program. VeRA-E draws fresh instances within a family; VeRA-H modifies the family toward harder tasks; and VeRA-H Pro selects one judge-ranked candidate from up to five validated proposals per seed. Execution checks, seed anchoring, answer discrimination, and independent human solving validate specifications and items. Accepted programs generate further labeled instances through local computation. Across 16 models, AIME-2024 accuracy decreases from 84.46% on seeds to 70.25% on VeRA-E variants, exposing a gap between fixed-item success and fresh-instance robustness. On AIME-2024-II, the human-audited VeRA-H Pro release lowers accuracy from 84.91% to 58.57%. Across the three hardening sources, H Pro has lower mean accuracy than H. On AMO-Bench, both releases average higher accuracy than the seeds under the evaluated budget. Initial auditing accepts 75.4% of hardened candidates; targeted repair raises usable yield to 95.1%. Executable families thus support repeatable benchmark renewal, with validation improving task quality and selection shaping the delivered challenge.

cs.AI

When can we trust untrusted monitoring? A safety case sketch across collusion strategies

AIs are increasingly being deployed with greater autonomy and capabilities, which increases the risk that a misaligned AI may be able to cause catastrophic harm. Untrusted monitoring -- using one untrusted model to oversee another -- is one approach to reducing risk. Justifying the safety of an untrusted monitoring deployment is challenging because developers cannot safely deploy a misaligned model to test their protocol directly. In this paper, we develop upon existing methods for rigorously demonstrating safety based on pre-deployment testing. We relax assumptions that previous AI control research made about the collusion strategies a misaligned AI might use to subvert untrusted monitoring. We develop a taxonomy covering passive self-recognition, causal collusion (hiding pre-shared signals), acausal collusion (hiding signals via Schelling points), and combined strategies. We create a safety case sketch to clearly present our argument, explicitly state our assumptions, and highlight unsolved challenges. We identify conditions under which passive self-recognition could be a more effective collusion strategy than those studied previously. Our work builds towards more robust evaluations of untrusted monitoring.

cs.AI