# From Uncertainty to Action: Learning to Steer LLM Agents

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.09115 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.09115/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reinforcement learning for LLM agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 39 of its 78 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 6 Oct 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Reinforcement learning for LLM agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/reinforcement-learning-for-llm-agents/)

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

- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.03629/) (2022)
- [On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.04599/) (2017)
- [Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.04761/) (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)
- [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)
- [τ-bench: A Benchmark for Tool-Agent-User Interaction in Real-World Domains](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12045/) (2024)
- [WebShop: Towards Scalable Real-World Web Interaction with Grounded Language Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.01206/) (2022)
- [ALFWorld: Aligning Text and Embodied Environments for Interactive Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.03768/) (2020)
- [DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.19348/) (2026)
- [Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yet](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01798/) (2023)
- [Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.13063/) (2023)
- [Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.08500/) (2017)
- [Teaching Models to Express Their Uncertainty in Words](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.14334/) (2022)
- [RouteLLM: Learning to Route LLMs with Preference Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.18665/) (2024)
- [Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.13657/) (2025)
- [Executable Code Actions Elicit Better LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01030/) (2024)
- [Agent Workflow Memory](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.07429/) (2024)
- [AgentBoard: An Analytical Evaluation Board of Multi-turn LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.13178/) (2024)
- [Conformal Risk Control](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.02814/) (2022)
- [Generating with Confidence: Uncertainty Quantification for Black-box Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.19187/) (2023)
- [Consistent Estimators for Learning to Defer to an Expert](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.01862/) (2020)
- [Gemma 4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.02770/) (2026)
- [A Stitch in Time Saves Nine: Detecting and Mitigating Hallucinations of LLMs by Validating Low-Confidence Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03987/) (2023)
- [Out-of-Distribution Detection and Selective Generation for Conditional Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.15558/) (2022)
- [Scalable Best-of-N Selection for Large Language Models via Self-Certainty](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.18581/) (2025)
- [Which Agent Causes Task Failures and When? On Automated Failure Attribution of LLM Multi-Agent Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.00212/) (2025)
- [Large Language Model Cascades with Mixture of Thoughts Representations for Cost-efficient Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03094/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Steering an LLM agent means deciding whether to correct it, at which step, and with which mechanism. Uncertainty is often used to decide when to correct an agent, but whether it can guide these decisions remains unclear. We steer agent trajectories separately at every non-terminal step with each of four mechanisms and run each continuation to completion. The resulting stepwise outcome table (SOT) holds about 82,000 counterfactual continuations of 1,864 trajectories from three benchmarks and two agents. It shows that uncertainty can identify failing trajectories, but that no single signal reliably locates the step at which steering helps. We therefore propose VoS (Value of Steering), a trajectory-level monitor, offline or online, that learns from SOT the value of steering at each step and decides where to steer by it. A harm-budgeted trigger decides whether to steer, limiting the fraction of successful trajectories that VoS disturbs. VoS improves on unmodified execution in all 12 settings of benchmark, agent, and offline or online use, by 7.8 points on average, and outperforms the strongest of five existing uncertainty-triggered methods in 11, by 2.9 points on average. Ablations show that training on measured outcomes and a tight harm budget are both essential.