Skip to main content
Search

# False Discovery Rate Control

3 related articles

Subscribe to updates
  1. arXiv

    Agents no longer accept self-edits on a higher score alone: TRUST cuts accepted bad updates from 45.59% to 2.78%

    Agents can rewrite their own prompts, memory, tools and workflows without retraining the underlying LLM, but the common greedy gate accepts any update whose validation score rises, so sampling noise can pass as real progress. TRUST recasts each round's acceptance as an online multiple hypothesis test, uses an LLM over historical context to set how much evidence a candidate needs, and corrects for reused validation samples. Across six settings on HotpotQA, DROP and APPS with DeepSeek-V4-Flash and Qwen-3.8-Flash, the mean share of accepted inferior updates falls from the greedy gate's 45.59% to 2.78%, and mean maximum drawdown falls from 4.963 to 0.047 percentage points.

  2. arXiv

    CADS scores an LLM proposer against the same screen with the LLM removed, and raw hit counts overstate its gain

    In sequential biological screens, LLM-proposed candidates are usually credited by hit counts, but the re-selection policy and random fallback also produce hits on their own. CADS runs the full loop beside an otherwise identical proposer-removed loop, certifies each discovery set separately, and reports the paired difference; in DepMap-backed simulations the no-LLM loop alone cleared the standard feedback gate, and origin counts inflated Qwen2.5-7B's net contribution from near zero to apparently positive.

  3. arXiv

    Sequential resetting procedures deliver horizon-independent FDR control for LLM watermark detection and financial backtesting

    The authors propose sequential resetting procedures built on e-values and test supermartingales that reset the capital to one after each rejection and continue testing, thereby reporting multiple intervals containing null violations; a refinement rule reports only observations after the within-block minimum of the capital. Under independent null e-values the FDR bound is α, while under dependence between null and non-null data the bound is α times a logarithmic factor with anytime validity, demonstrated on LLM watermark detection and ES backtesting.

You’re all caught up