# Calibrated Decisions at Scale: Converting Police Crash Narratives into Probabilistic Crash Variables with a System One Model (Jev)

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.24052 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.24052/

## Key facts

- Cited by 14 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 39 of its 124 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 21 Sep 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 39)

- [On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.04599/) (2017)
- [A Baseline for Detecting Misclassified and Out-of-Distribution Examples in Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02136/) (2016)
- [Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Know](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.05221/) (2022)
- [Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.13063/) (2023)
- [ChatGPT Outperforms Crowd-Workers for Text-Annotation Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.15056/) (2023)
- [FrugalGPT: How to Use Large Language Models While Reducing Cost and Improving Performance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.05176/) (2023)
- [Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.08500/) (2017)
- [Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.09664/) (2023)
- [Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14975/) (2023)
- [Teaching Models to Express Their Uncertainty in Words](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.14334/) (2022)
- [Measuring Calibration in Deep Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.01685/) (2019)
- [How Can We Know When Language Models Know? On the Calibration of Language Models for Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.00955/) (2020)
- [Beyond temperature scaling: Obtaining well-calibrated multiclass probabilities with Dirichlet calibration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.12656/) (2019)
- [SelectiveNet: A Deep Neural Network with an Integrated Reject Option](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.09192/) (2019)
- [Calibration of Pre-trained Transformers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.07892/) (2020)
- [Verified Uncertainty Calibration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.10155/) (2019)
- [Distribution-Free, Risk-Controlling Prediction Sets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.02703/) (2021)
- [Learn then Test: Calibrating Predictive Algorithms to Achieve Risk Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.01052/) (2021)
- [A Survey of Confidence Estimation and Calibration in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.08298/) (2023)
- [Can Large Language Models Transform Computational Social Science?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03514/) (2023)
- [Selective Question Answering under Domain Shift](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.09462/) (2020)
- [Reducing conversational agents' overconfidence through linguistic calibration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.14983/) (2020)
- [Is GPT-3 a Good Data Annotator?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10450/) (2022)
- [Evaluating model calibration in classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.06977/) (2019)
- [Active Testing: Sample-Efficient Model Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.05331/) (2021)
- [Investigating Selective Prediction Approaches Across Several Tasks in IID, OOD, and Adversarial Settings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.00211/) (2022)
- [Adaptation with Self-Evaluation to Improve Selective Prediction in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.11689/) (2023)
- [Regression Diagnostics meets Forecast Evaluation: Conditional Calibration, Reliability Diagrams, and Coefficient of Determination](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.03210/) (2021)
- [Evaluating probabilistic classifiers: Reliability diagrams and score decompositions revisited](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.03033/) (2020)
- [Large Language Models in Analyzing Crash Narratives -- A Comparative Study of ChatGPT, BARD and GPT-4](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.13563/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 14 of 14)

- [Beyond Calibration: Do a Typed-Decision Model's Probabilities Obey the Probability Axioms?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.33209/) (2026)
- [Calibrated Decision Models for Autonomous Penetration-Testing Harnesses: JEV and Laya as System One Decision Layers for LLM-Driven Pentest Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.28940/) (2026)
- [Typed Decision Models: An Early Evidence Audit and Evaluation Checklist](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.32160/) (2026)
- [Probability Contracts: Accuracy, Coherence, and Decisions Across LLM Interfaces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.37470/) (2026)
- [From Text Decisions to Pixels: An Study of Jev-Style Visual Choice Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.29283/) (2026)
- [Benchmarking System One decision models against trained classifiers and language models for automated decision gates](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.00346/) (2026)
- [Hidden Risks of Jev: An Empirical Study of Security, Privacy, and Dual Use](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.04985/) (2026)
- [More Features Are Not More Evidence: Limits of Training-Free Human Activity Recognition with Jev](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.36154/) (2026)
- [OmniMed-Jev: Calibrating LVLM Confidence for Trustworthy Medical Multimodal Decisions via System One](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.00381/) (2026)
- [Jev-IDS: System One Models for Network Intrusion Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.01079/) (2026)
- [From Retrieval to Typed Decisions: Calibrated System One Models from Biomedical Sentence Encoders](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.02486/) (2026)
- [Estimating Uncoded Crash Factors with Tabular Foundation and System One Models: Kumo Tabular and Jev](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.10321/) (2026)
- [Can Jev be Your Q or Policy in Reinforcement Learning?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.11692/) (2026)
- [When Faster Decisions Do Not Make Better Agents: An Empirical Study of Jev in Agent Workflows](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.13092/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Crash datasets that carry an investigator narrative hold information the coded fields omit. Coding those narratives at scale has been blocked by three obstacles. Frontier large language models are costly at that scale, their generated text cannot be verified, and no rule says how much output a human must check. This paper formulates narrative coding as gated, typed decisions answered by Jev, a System One model that returns probabilities over analyst-defined options and generates no text. A screen covered 499,500 Texas narratives and 195,857 were coded with a 27-question schema. Cost is governed by schema size rather than narrative length. The probabilities are audited against coded fields and against 2,416 blinded human judgments drawn under a stated sampling design. Two frontier large language models are benchmarked on the same records. Against human labels the typed model attains an F1 of 0.908. One frontier model gains 0.059 and the other is indistinguishable from it. Calibration varies by model rather than by paradigm, so each model must be audited. Recalibration on the same labels reduces calibration error by a factor of 3.3. Agreement with coded fields understates fidelity to the narrative by a median of 0.26 in kappa. A resolution-floor bound covers any model that reports probabilities on a discrete grid. A review budget over flagged records gives the records a human must read per variable and per year. Adding the calibrated variables to the coded fields raises the injury and fatal crashes attributed to nine factors by 10,747 per year.