Partially Correlated Verifier Cascades in LLM Harnesses: Concave Log-Odds, Polynomial Reliability, and Blind-Spot Ceilings
Abstract
Serial verification gates are a core reliability primitive in LLM harnesses: a candidate answer is returned only if k verifier calls all accept it. Under conditionally independent gates, the recent Odds Law (arXiv:2606.15712) shows that posterior log-odds grow linearly in k, so failure decays exponentially, and states that "a tight theory of partially correlated verifier cascades remains open." This note gives a minimal such theory. Modeling the per-instance false-accept rate on the generator's own errors as a latent variable αsim G (de Finetti), the exact cascade posterior is ell_k = ell_0 - ln m_k, with m_k the k-th moment of G. Then: (i) ell_k is concave in k for every non-degenerate G -- the Odds Law is its tangent at the first gate and an upper bound; (ii) for Beta(a,b) latents, failure decays polynomially, 1-r_k asymp k^{-b}, with correlation parameter ρ_v = 1/(a+b+1); (iii) a blind-spot atom of mass 1-π at α=1 caps the evidence extractable from any number of gates at -ln(1-π) nats, so reliability saturates below 1; (iv) letting the true-accept rate also vary (βsim H) yields a trichotomy -- gates eventually always help, plateau, or actively harm -- decided by the upper-tail exponents of G and H, with closed-form crossover k^dagger. The mechanism is survivorship: errors surviving gates are the high-α ones. The theory is measurable: R repeated verdicts per instance identify the first R moments of G, so two verdicts identify ρ_v; beta-binomial likelihood and NPMLE recover the reliability curve and the ill-posed ceiling. In synthetic tests, independence-based extrapolation underestimates failure by 20x at k=5 and ~3000x at k=10; the correlated fit at R=8 tracks held-out depths. The practical lever is decorrelation -- changing model family, modality, or evidence source -- not adding gates.
Community
This paper develops a theory of partially correlated verifier cascades—stacked accept/reject gates in an LLM harness whose errors are correlated rather than independent. It shows that correlation makes the per-gate log-odds gain concave, turns failure decay from exponential to polynomial under heavy-tailed difficulty, and creates a "blind-spot ceiling" of instances every verifier wrongly accepts; a trichotomy theorem gives a closed-form point past which adding gates stops helping (or hurts). It also gives an inversion protocol that recovers the correlation parameter from just two repeated verdicts per instance, addressing an open problem left by recent work on odds-law cascades.
This is an automated message from the Librarian Bot. I found the following papers similar to this paper.
The following papers were recommended by the Semantic Scholar API
- How Much of the Routing Gap Is Real? Decomposing the Router-to-Oracle Gap into Reproducible Specialist Advantage and Single-Draw Label Noise (2026)
- Selection Without Signal, Recovery Through Expression: A Measurement Study of Post-Hoc Falsification Operators for Frozen Small Code Models (2026)
- CASP: Learning-Augmented Offline Approximation with Verifiable Certificates and Bounded-Loss PAC Guarantees (2026)
- The Security Budget of Code-LLM Prompt Hardening: Provable Limits Under Pass-Only Acceptance (2026)
- When the Reward Suite Is Leaky: A Preregistered Causal Contrast of Natural Verifier False Positives in RLVR (2026)
- Self-Evolving Agents with Anytime-Valid Certificates (2026)
- Hard or Just Unreached? Diagnosing the Sampling Blind Spot in Math-Reasoning Difficulty Estimation (2026)
Please give a thumbs up to this comment if you found it helpful!
If you want recommendations for any Paper on Hugging Face checkout this Space
You can directly ask Librarian Bot for paper recommendations by tagging it in a comment: @librarian-bot recommend
Get this paper in your agent:
hf papers read 2607.13918 Don't have the latest CLI?
curl -LsSf https://hf.co/cli/install.sh | bash Models citing this paper 0
No model linking this paper
Datasets citing this paper 0
No dataset linking this paper
Spaces citing this paper 0
No Space linking this paper
Collections including this paper 0
No Collection including this paper