원문 초록
When AI agents screen items for a costly human assessor, as in agentic search, e-discovery and AI reviewing of papers, only what they pass gets judged. We show what each kind of evidence can establish about their errors, even with unlimited data. Agreement shows that agents concur, not that they are right, however many there are. Acceptance by the assessor gives precision but only a lower bound on recall. Knowing which agents found which relevant items gives an upper bound on recall if agents' finds are not negatively correlated, and caps what one more agent can add if agents are interchangeable. Without assumptions about the agents, recall can be pinned down only by judging items they did not pass: a random sample of these estimates how many relevant items were missed, to any chosen accuracy, and the sample needed does not grow with the number of agents.
제출 이력
확인된 버전만 표시합니다. 전체 제출 이력은 arXiv 원문에서 확인하세요.
- arXiv:2611.12705v1제출 시각 미확인
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
공통 태그로 연결된 공개 논문이 아직 없습니다.
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.