Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2606.00476

Doing What They Say, Not What They Reason: Locating the Faithfulness Gap in LLM Agents

Yufeng Wang
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Do LLM agents act on the reasoning they state? This question of process fidelity is central to LLM-based social simulation, yet hard to measure where no reference for correct behavior exists. We study it in a controlled setting: a Texas Poker simulator with a verifiable reference action for every decision by splitting the faithfulness gap into two steps: reasoning-to-conclusion (does the stated decision follow from the agent's own reasoning?) and conclusion-to-action (does the agent execute what it states?). The two steps behave very differently. Conclusion-to-action is reliable: inconsistency is 0.7% for Claude Haiku 4.5 and 1.4% for DeepSeek-Reasoner once the conclusion is read from an explicit tag, whereas free-text conclusion extraction reports 22-26%. Reasoning-to-conclusion is where fidelity frays, but not through a single dominant failure. In a step-level diagnostic the agent's errors split roughly evenly between bad inputs, borderline cases, and rule misapplication deriving a conclusion that contradicts the agent's own restated rule from inputs it estimated correctly. This composition is model-dependent: rule misapplication accounts for a third of Haiku's interpretable errors but only 8% of DeepSeek's. The one robust signal is directional: when an agent does misapply its own stated rule, it almost always (99.5% for Haiku) errs in the risk-averse direction. The override is partly hedging behavior, not a capability limit: instructing the agent to apply the rule mechanically halves the misapplication rate (13.9% to 6.8% of decisions) and raises adherence by eight points. Process-fidelity evaluation should therefore elicit machine-checkable conclusions and probe for directional biases rather than assume a single upstream failure mode, lest it conflate measurement noise with model behavior.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Yufeng Wang. 2026-07-06. Doing What They Say, Not What They Reason: Locating the Faithfulness Gap in LLM Agents. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.00476

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Collab-Solver: Collaborative Solving Policy Learning for Mixed-Integer Linear Programming

Mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) has been a fundamental problem in combinatorial optimization. Conventional MILP solving mainly relies on carefully designed heuristics embedded in the branch-and-bound framework. Driven by the strong capabilities of neural networks, recent research is exploring the value of machine learning alongside conventional MILP solving. Although learning-based MILP methods have shown great promise, existing works typically learn policies for individual modules in MILP solvers in isolation, without considering their interdependence, which limits both solving efficiency and solution quality. To address this limitation, we propose Collab-Solver, a novel multi-agent-based policy learning framework for MILP that enables collaborative policy optimization for multiple modules. Specifically, we formulate the collaboration between cut selection and branching in MILP solving as a Stackelberg game. Under this formulation, we develop a two-phase learning paradigm to stabilize collaborative policy learning: the first phase performs data-communicated policy pretraining, and the second phase further orchestrates the policy learning for various modules. Extensive experiments on both synthetic and large-scale real-world MILP datasets demonstrate that the jointly learned policies significantly improve solving performance. Moreover, the policies learned by Collab-Solver have also demonstrated excellent generalization abilities across different instance sets.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Fact Grounded Attention: Eliminating Hallucination in Large Language Models Through Attention Level Knowledge Integration

"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." Large Language Models have conquered natural language but remain prisoners of their own probabilistic nature--confidently hallucinating facts they never truly knew. We present Fact Grounded Attention (FGA), a novel architectural modification that transforms unreliable language models into deterministic truth tellers by injecting verifiable knowledge directly into the attention mechanism. Unlike existing approaches that patch hallucinations after generation or prepend retrieved text, FGA intervenes at the mathematical heart of the transformer--the pre-softmax attention scores--creating a model that cannot hallucinate when facts exist in its knowledge base. Our experiments across 1,107 technical queries spanning smartphones, laptops, and electric vehicles demonstrate a transformation from 6.3% accuracy in vanilla Llama 3.2 to 99.7% accuracy with FGA. More critically, knowledge updates occur in under one second without retraining, compared to hours for parameter editing approaches. FGA doesn't just reduce hallucination--it eliminates it entirely for verifiable facts, marking a fundamental shift from probabilistic approximation to deterministic precision in neural language generation.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

MemeLens: Multilingual Multitask VLMs for Memes

Memes are a dominant medium for online communication and manipulation because meaning emerges from interactions between embedded text, imagery, and cultural context. Existing meme research is distributed across tasks (e.g., \textit{hate, misogyny, propaganda, sentiment, humour}) and languages, which limits cross-domain generalization. To address this gap, we propose \textsc{MemeLens}, a unified multilingual, multitask explanation-enhanced Vision-Language Model (VLM) for meme understanding. We consolidate $38$ public meme datasets, filter and map dataset-specific labels into a shared taxonomy of $20$ tasks spanning harm, targets, figurative/pragmatic intent, and affect. We present a comprehensive empirical analysis across modeling paradigms, task categories, and datasets. Our findings suggest that robust meme understanding requires multimodal training, varies substantially across semantic categories, and remains sensitive to over-specialization when models are fine-tuned on individual datasets rather than trained in a unified setting. We make the experimental resources (https://github.com/MohamedBayan/MemeLens), model (https://huggingface.co/QCRI/MemeLens-VLM) and datasets (https://huggingface.co/datasets/QCRI/MemeLens) publicly available to the community.

cs.AI↗