Making LLMs Reliable When It Matters Most: A Five-Layer Architecture for High-Stakes Decisions
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Current large language models (LLMs) excel in verifiable domains where outputs can be checked before action but prove less reliable for high-stakes strategic decisions with uncertain outcomes. This gap, driven by mutually reinforcing cognitive biases in both humans and artificial intelligence (AI) systems, threatens the defensibility of valuations and sustainability of investments in the sector. This report describes a framework emerging from systematic qualitative assessment across 7 frontier-grade LLMs and 3 market-facing venture vignettes under time pressure. Detailed prompting specifying decision partnership and explicitly instructing avoidance of sycophancy, confabulation, solution drift, and nihilism achieved initial partnership state but failed to maintain it under operational pressure. Sustaining protective partnership state required an emergent 7-stage calibration sequence, built upon a 4-stage initialization process, within a 5-layer protection architecture enabling bias self-monitoring, human-AI adversarial challenge, partnership state verification, performance degradation detection, and stakeholder protection. Three discoveries resulted: partnership state is achievable through ordered calibration but requires emergent maintenance protocols; reliability degrades when architectural drift and context exhaustion align; and dissolution discipline prevents costly pursuit of fundamentally wrong directions. Cross-model validation revealed systematic performance differences across LLM architectures. This approach demonstrates that human-AI teams can achieve cognitive partnership capable of preventing avoidable regret in high-stakes decisions, addressing return-on-investment expectations that depend on AI systems supporting consequential decision-making without introducing preventable cognitive traps when verification arrives too late.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Nov 2025.
Builds on
24 of 51 references.
References · 24
- 2023Large Language Modelscited by 774
- 2025Why Language Models Hallucinatecited by 205
- 2024Seven Failure Points When Engineering a Retrieval Augmented Generation Systemcited by 138
- 2024What Large Language Models Know and What People Think They Knowcited by 109
- 2025A Survey on Code Generation with LLM-based Agentscited by 104
- 2024When combinations of humans and AI are useful: A systematic review and meta-analysiscited by 100
- 2024Sycophancy in Large Language Models: Causes and Mitigationscited by 97
- 2024On the Algorithmic Bias of Aligning Large Language Models with RLHF: Preference Collapse and Matching Regularizationcited by 72
- 2025When Truth Is Overridden: Uncovering the Internal Origins of Sycophancy in Large Language Modelscited by 46
- 2025Unveiling Causal Reasoning in Large Language Models: Reality or Mirage?cited by 36
- 2025A Survey on Large Language Model Benchmarkscited by 32
- 2025Sycophancy Is Not One Thing: Causal Separation of Sycophantic Behaviors in LLMscited by 32
12 more
- 2025VERINA: Benchmarking Verifiable Code Generationcited by 30
- 2024AI Companions Reduce Lonelinesscited by 28
- 2025Interaction Context Often Increases Sycophancy in LLMscited by 21
- 2025A comprehensive taxonomy of hallucinations in Large Language Modelscited by 18
- 2025LLM/Agent-as-Data-Analyst: A Surveycited by 15
- 2025Firm or Fickle? Evaluating Large Language Models Consistency in Sequential Interactionscited by 12
- 2025Formalising Human-in-the-Loop: Computational Reductions, Failure Modes, and Legal-Moral Responsibilitycited by 7
- 2025LLM Cannot Discover Causality, and Should Be Restricted to Non-Decisional Support in Causal Discoverycited by 7
- 2025On the Fundamental Impossibility of Hallucination Control in Large Language Modelscited by 6
- 2025Comparing Uncertainty Measurement and Mitigation Methods for Large Language Models: A Systematic Reviewcited by 3
- 2025Bias after Prompting: Persistent Discrimination in Large Language Modelscited by 3
- 2025Uncovering Representation Bias for Investment Decisions in Open-Source Large Language Modelscited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.