ConceptRM: The Quest to Mitigate Alert Fatigue through Consensus-Based Purity-Driven Data Cleaning for Reflection Modelling
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
In many applications involving intelligent agents, the overwhelming volume of alerts (mostly false) generated by the agents may desensitize users and cause them to overlook critical issues, leading to the so-called ''alert fatigue''. A common strategy is to train a reflection model as a filter to intercept false alerts with labelled data collected from user verification feedback. However, a key challenge is the noisy nature of such data as it is often collected in production environments. As cleaning noise via manual annotation incurs high costs, this paper proposes a novel method ConceptRM for constructing a high-quality corpus to train a reflection model capable of effectively intercepting false alerts. With only a small amount of expert annotations as anchors, ConceptRM creates perturbed datasets with varying noise ratios and utilizes co-teaching to train multiple distinct models for collaborative learning. By analyzing the consensus decisions of these models, it effectively identifies reliable negative samples from a noisy dataset. Experimental results demonstrate that ConceptRM significantly enhances the interception of false alerts with minimal annotation cost, outperforming several state-of-the-art LLM baselines by up to 53.31% on in-domain datasets and 41.67% on out-of-domain datasets.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Feb 2026.
Builds on
20 of 31 references.
References · 20
- 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,317
- 2016Temporal Ensembling for Semi-Supervised Learningcited by 1,054
- 2018Co-teaching: Robust Training of Deep Neural Networks with Extremely Noisy Labelscited by 1,053
- 2017A Closer Look at Memorization in Deep Networkscited by 936
- 2017Virtual Adversarial Training: A Regularization Method for Supervised and Semi-Supervised Learningcited by 918
- 2019How does Disagreement Help Generalization against Label Corruption?cited by 390
- 2024INSIDE: LLMs' Internal States Retain the Power of Hallucination Detectioncited by 317
- 2020A Survey of Label-noise Representation Learning: Past, Present and Futurecited by 121
- 2024SoftPatch: Unsupervised Anomaly Detection with Noisy Datacited by 55
- 2023LLaMA-Reviewer: Advancing Code Review Automation with Large Language Models through Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuningcited by 47
- 2024Understanding the Dark Side of LLMs' Intrinsic Self-Correctioncited by 42
- 2024CodeMirage: Hallucinations in Code Generated by Large Language Modelscited by 23
8 more
- 2025BitsAI-CR: Automated Code Review via LLM in Practicecited by 22
- 2024AI-Assisted Assessment of Coding Practices in Modern Code Reviewcited by 16
- 2025What Types of Code Review Comments Do Developers Most Frequently Resolve?cited by 7
- 2025A Systematic Literature Review of Code Hallucinations in LLMs: Characterization, Mitigation Methods, Challenges, and Future Directions for Reliable AIcited by 6
- 2025iCodeReviewer: Improving Secure Code Review with Mixture of Promptscited by 5
- 2025Issue-Oriented Agent-Based Framework for Automated Review Comment Generationcited by 4
- 2023An Empirical Study on Noisy Label Learning for Program Understandingcited by 2
- 2025Large Language Models as Information Sources: Distinctive Characteristics and Types of Low-Quality Informationcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.