# Answer Engineering: Local Trajectory Editing for Protocol-Constrained Decision Making in Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.21121 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.21121/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 29 of its 48 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 19 Jun 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 29 of 29)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.06180/) (2023)
- [Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.11171/) (2022)
- [Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.11366/) (2023)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.10601/) (2023)
- [SGLang: Efficient Execution of Structured Language Model Programs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.07104/) (2023)
- [Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04388/) (2023)
- [CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11738/) (2023)
- [Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.13702/) (2023)
- [Trustworthy LLMs: a Survey and Guideline for Evaluating Large Language Models' Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.05374/) (2023)
- [FUDGE: Controlled Text Generation With Future Discriminators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.05218/) (2021)
- [NeMo Guardrails: A Toolkit for Controllable and Safe LLM Applications with Programmable Rails](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.10501/) (2023)
- [Trusting Your Evidence: Hallucinate Less with Context-aware Decoding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14739/) (2023)
- [Diverse Beam Search: Decoding Diverse Solutions from Neural Sequence Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02424/) (2016)
- [Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.13379/) (2023)
- [Lexically Constrained Decoding for Sequence Generation Using Grid Beam Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.07138/) (2017)
- [Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.08679/) (2025)
- [Improving Instruction-Following in Language Models through Activation Steering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12877/) (2024)
- [SelfCheck: Using LLMs to Zero-Shot Check Their Own Step-by-Step Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.00436/) (2023)
- [Making Reasoning Matter: Measuring and Improving Faithfulness of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.13950/) (2024)
- [Faithfulness vs. Plausibility: On the (Un)Reliability of Explanations from Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.04614/) (2024)
- [Controllable Text Generation for Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.12599/) (2024)
- [DeAL: Decoding-time Alignment for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.06147/) (2024)
- [Automata-based constraints for language model decoding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.08103/) (2024)
- [Med-PRM: Medical Reasoning Models with Stepwise, Guideline-verified Process Rewards](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.11474/) (2025)
- [Towards A Unified View of Answer Calibration for Multi-Step Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.09101/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models can produce confident but protocol-invalid answers in domains where procedural compliance is critical. This paper presents Answer Engineering, a deterministic runtime and authoring layer that applies localized rule-guided interventions to the visible reasoning trajectory during standard autoregressive generation, without retraining, modifying model weights, or performing global search. The method is evaluated on a controlled clinical benchmark for sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL), where correct management depends on protocol-consistent interpretation of symptom timing, Weber/Rinne tuning-fork findings, and otoscopic findings. In the benchmark, step-by-step reasoning shifted rather than eliminated errors: compliant outcomes for SSNHL decreased from 54.5% under unguided generation to 25.1%, while acceptance on the conductive contrast condition increased from 1.6% to 58.9%. Local trajectory editing increased SSNHL compliance to 83.5% and conductive-case adherence to 77.9%, raising balanced accuracy from 42.0% under reasoning-only generation to 80.7%. The results support a systems-level view in which protocol adherence can be improved through auditable runtime control of reasoning trajectories, while also identifying limitations caused by rule coverage, trigger reliability, and persistent diagnosis-first generation dynamics.