Preemptive Detection and Correction of Misaligned Actions in LLM Agents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deploying LLM-based agents in real-life applications often faces a critical challenge: the misalignment between agents’ behavior and user intent. Such misalignment may lead agents to unintentionally execute some critical actions that carry negative outcomes (e.g., accidentally triggering a textitbuy-now in web shopping), resulting in undesirable or even irreversible consequences. Although addressing these issues is crucial, the preemptive detection and correction of misaligned actions remains relatively underexplored. To fill this gap, we introduce textttInferAct, a novel approach that leverages the belief reasoning ability of LLMs, grounded in Theory-of-Mind, to detect misaligned actions. Once the misalignment is detected, textttInferAct alerts users for timely correction, preventing adverse outcomes and enhancing the reliability of LLM agents' decision-making processes. Experiments on three widely used tasks demonstrate textttInferAct achieves up to 20% improvements on Marco-F1 against baselines in misaligned action detection. An in-depth evaluation of misalignment correction further highlights textttInferAct's effectiveness in improving agent alignment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".