mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Trajectory-Derived Confidence for Reliable, Resource-Aware Clinical Text-to-SQL Agents

arXiv 2610.04156 ↗First posted 2 Oct 2026cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Medical and scientific domain agents

Abstract (arXiv)

LLM agents for clinical text-to-SQL applications reason autonomously over multiple steps but cannot assess whether their own reasoning or outputs can be trusted. In high leverage applications such as healthcare, this presents a critical risk where system mistakes can be costly. These reliability failures are also resource failures: an incorrect reasoning trajectory spends computation budget on outputs that must be discarded. We introduce Sentinel, a trajectory-derived, classifier-based confidence layer that analyzes an agent's reasoning, code and database outputs to decide at three points whether to stop: refusing unanswerable questions before the agent runs, halting doomed trajectories mid-run, and withholding untrustworthy answers at delivery. Here, utilizing Chow's rule, we optimize decisions under the EHRSQL shared task's Reliability Score, which penalizes incorrect answers given a utility weighting, and find on the benchmark EHRSQL that Sentinel raises this score from +0.08 to +0.24 when mistakes have a low utility weighting, well above the +0.03 earned by refusing every question, with delivered-answer accuracy rising from 54% to 69% as coverage falls from 84% to 55%. At higher stakes the agents we test rarely answer reliably enough to deliver, and Sentinel detects this on its own, abstaining to that same +0.03 where the unmonitored agent scores -3.02. The same stopping decisions cut computation: at low stakes, where the system still answers, Sentinel eliminates 13-28% of agent steps at little or no reliability cost.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Medical and scientific domain agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 33 of its 49 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Oct 2026.

Builds on

33 of 49 references.

References · 33

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  2. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 9,379
  3. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
  4. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
  5. 2024GPT-4o System Cardcited by 4,588
  6. 2023Let's Verify Step by Stepcited by 3,789
  7. 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,856
  8. 2024Qwen2.5-Coder Technical Reportcited by 1,203
  9. 2018Spider: A Large-Scale Human-Labeled Dataset for Complex and Cross-Domain Semantic Parsing and Text-to-SQL Taskcited by 1,139
  10. 2023Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Promptingcited by 1,122
  11. 2023Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMscited by 974
  12. 2023FrugalGPT: How to Use Large Language Models While Reducing Cost and Improving Performancecited by 853
21 more
  1. 2017Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networkscited by 852
  2. 2023Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoningcited by 703
  3. 2017Seq2SQL: Generating Structured Queries from Natural Language using Reinforcement Learningcited by 687
  4. 2024Smarter, Better, Faster, Longer: A Modern Bidirectional Encoder for Fast, Memory Efficient, and Long Context Finetuning and Inferencecited by 554
  5. 2025Phi-4-Mini Technical Report: Compact yet Powerful Multimodal Language Models via Mixture-of-LoRAscited by 521
  6. 2015Compositional Semantic Parsing on Semi-Structured Tablescited by 515
  7. 2023DIN-SQL: Decomposed In-Context Learning of Text-to-SQL with Self-Correctioncited by 477
  8. 2020Selective Question Answering under Domain Shiftcited by 238
  9. 2024Chain-of-Table: Evolving Tables in the Reasoning Chain for Table Understandingcited by 188
  10. 2021Machine Learning with a Reject Option: A surveycited by 109
  11. 2018Robust Text-to-SQL Generation with Execution-Guided Decodingcited by 52
  12. 2023EHRSQL: A Practical Text-to-SQL Benchmark for Electronic Health Recordscited by 45
  13. 2024TrustSQL: Benchmarking Text-to-SQL Reliability with Penalty-Based Scoringcited by 17
  14. 2025SQLens: An End-to-End Framework for Error Detection and Correction in Text-to-SQLcited by 12
  15. 2024Overview of the EHRSQL 2024 Shared Task on Reliable Text-to-SQL Modeling on Electronic Health Recordscited by 11
  16. 2025Confidence Estimation for Error Detection in Text-to-SQL Systemscited by 11
  17. 2024ProbGate at EHRSQL 2024: Enhancing SQL Query Generation Accuracy through Probabilistic Threshold Filtering and Error Handlingcited by 7
  18. 2026TABQAWORLD: Optimizing Multimodal Reasoning for Multi-Turn Table Question Answeringcited by 4
  19. 2026Enhancing Table Reasoning with Deterministic Table-State Rewardscited by 3
  20. 2026From Table to Cell: Attention for Better Reasoning with TABALIGNcited by 2
  21. 2026The "I Don't Know" Filter: Enhancing Agentic Reliability in Function Callingcited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Trustworthy Agents for Electronic Health Records through Confidence Estimation
  2. 2026EHR-RobustGym: Benchmarking and Training Agents for Robust Clinical Reasoning
  3. 2026Constructing and Evaluating Clinical Reasoning Trajectories for Medical Agent
  4. 2026ART: Action-based Reasoning Task Benchmarking for Medical AI Agents
  5. 2026TrustDABench: Benchmarking Reliability and Robustness of LLMs for Structured Data Analysis
  6. 2025SCARE: A Benchmark for SQL Correction and Question Answerability Classification for Reliable EHR Question Answering
  7. 2024EHRAgent: Code Empowers Large Language Models for Few-shot Complex Tabular Reasoning on Electronic Health Records
  8. 2026ReliableTableQA:How Much Supervision Does Reliability Annotation Need?