Conformal Arbitrage: Risk-Controlled Balancing of Competing Objectives in Language Models
William Overman, Mohsen Bayati
Abstract
Modern language-model deployments must often balance competing objectives-for example, helpfulness versus harmlessness, cost versus accuracy, and reward versus safety. We introduce Conformal Arbitrage, a post-hoc framework that learns a data-driven threshold to mediate between a Primary model optimized for a primary objective and a more conservative Guardian-which could be another model or a human domain expert-aligned with a guardrail objective. The threshold is calibrated with conformal risk control, yielding finite-sample, distribution-free guarantees that the long-run frequency of undesirable events (such as factual errors or safety violations) does not exceed a user-specified quota. Because Conformal Arbitrage operates wholly at the API level-without requiring access to model logits or updating model weights-it complements weight-based alignment techniques and integrates seamlessly with existing cost-aware cascades. Empirically, Conformal Arbitrage traces an efficient frontier, allowing users to define an acceptable performance level for one objective while maximizing utility in another. We observe that our method outperforms (in terms of accuracy on multiple-choice style questions) cost-matched random routing between models. These properties make Conformal Arbitrage a practical, theoretically grounded tool for trustworthy and economical deployment of large language models across a broad range of potentially competing objectives.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 3113c384-7ba6-4909-9231-91cb39e05fbcCited by top-tier papers4
- COFT: Counterfactual–Conformal Decoding for Fair Chain‑of‑Thought Reasoning in Large Language ModelsArya Fayyazi, Mehdi Kamal, Massoud PedramICML 2026
- Can LLM Safety Be Ensured by Constraining Parameter Regions?Zongmin Li, Jian Su, Farah Benamara, Aixin SunACL 2026
- Safety Game: Inference-Time Alignment of Black-Box LLMs via Constrained OptimizationTuan Nguyen, Long Tran-ThanhICML 2026
- Calibrating Conservatism for Scalable OversightWilliam Overman, Mohsen BayatiICML 2026
Builds on22
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward ModelRafael Rafailov, Archit Sharma, Eric Mitchell, Christopher D. Manning et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 10,924 citations
- Measuring Massive Multitask Language UnderstandingDan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou et al.ICLR 2021 · 7,905 citations
- Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-FeedbackAman Madaan, Niket Tandon, Prakhar Gupta, Skyler Hallinan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 4,972 citations
- Let's Verify Step by StepHunter Lightman, Vineet Kosaraju, Yuri Burda, Harrison Edwards et al.ICLR 2024 · 3,045 citations
Related papers
- Conformal Constrained Policy Optimization for Cost-Effective LLM AgentsWenwen Si, Sooyong Jang, Insup Lee, Osbert BastaniAAAI 2026 · 3 citations
- FlexGuard: Continuous Risk Scoring for Strictness-Adaptive LLM Content ModerationZhihao Ding, Jinming Li, Ze Lu, Jieming ShiACL 2026 · 2 citations
- Conformal Alignment: Knowing When to Trust Foundation Models with GuaranteesYu Gui, Ying Jin, Zhimei RenNeurIPS 2024 · 63 citations
- Conformal Tail Risk Control for Large Language Model AlignmentCatherine Yu-Chi Chen, Jingyan Shen, Zhun Deng, Lihua LeiICML 2025
- Beyond Expectations: Quantile-Guided Alignment for Risk-Calibrated Language ModelsXinran Wang, Jin Du, Azal Ahmad Khan, Qi Le et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 1 citation
