Hrishikesh Paranjape

Hrishikesh Paranjape, Abhishek Mandal, Xian Sun

Sequential filtering pipelines are a common design pattern in large-scale systems, where a large population of items is progressively reduced by a sequence of stages that each incur cost. Despite their prevalence in ranking systems, cascaded machine learning inference, and fraud detection, filter ordering is often determined by heuristics without formal guarantees. We formalize sequential filtering under an expected-cost objective and prove that, under an independence model, ordering filters by increasing ratio of cost to rejection probability minimizes expected total cost. Extensive Monte Carlo simulations show that the optimal ordering strictly dominates common heuristics across all runs, both in expectation and across the full distribution of outcomes.

Xian Sun, Wei Gao, Yingshuo Wang et al.

Reasoning models are increasingly used in settings where the final answer is not the only object of review: educational tools may show students intermediate steps, decision-support systems may require human oversight, and audit workflows may inspect traces for misleading or biased input. In such settings, two responses can receive the same final-answer score while differing in whether the trace explicitly flags injected biasing content. Accuracy-only evaluation collapses these cases. We study this gap as a measurement blind spot for responsible evaluation and introduce a minimal trace-level diagnostic with two axes: \emph{susceptibility} (whether the bias breaks a previously correct answer) and \emph{acknowledgment} (whether the trace contains a rubric-defined surface reference to the injected content). Across thousands of biased GSM8K trials, GPT-4o and Claude Sonnet~4 have similar susceptibility rates ($1.3\%$ vs.\ $1.2\%$) but substantially different acknowledgment rates ($13.0\%$ vs.\ $75.0\%$) under the same rubric.