arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language · · 4 min read

Explanatory Engagement Under Rare Anomalous Failure: Asymptotic Rarity in Model Behavior (or: The Asymptotic AI)

Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.

Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence

arXiv:2608.13063 (cs)
[Submitted on 13 Aug 2026]

Title:Explanatory Engagement Under Rare Anomalous Failure: Asymptotic Rarity in Model Behavior (or: The Asymptotic AI)

Authors:Sam Mao
View a PDF of the paper titled Explanatory Engagement Under Rare Anomalous Failure: Asymptotic Rarity in Model Behavior (or: The Asymptotic AI), by Sam Mao
View PDF
Abstract:Prior work on LLM behavior under anomalous conditions asks whether a model notices anomalies. We ask a narrower question: once a model sits in a workflow with a low, controllable failure rate, does its explanatory engagement - length, specificity, self-reported confidence - change as failure grows asymptotically rarer? We built a local, zero-cost harness on three open-weight models (qwen3:8b, llama3.1:8b, mistral:7b) running a repeated tool-call task where one call fails at probability p, swept across eight rates from 0.2 to 0.0001, under five elicitation conditions from immediate prompting to none. We hypothesized a rise in engagement as failures grew rarer, then a collapse near a detectability threshold. Pooled across conditions this appeared false: length fell in a flat, monotonic pattern. Splitting by condition overturned that. Under immediate_forced, where the model must explain every failure instantly, the predicted rise is confirmed but followed by a plateau, not a collapse: length peaks at 28.4 words at p=0.05, settles to 17.4-19.0 words at the rarest rates, and confidence rises unevenly from about 53% to the 70s-90s. Under grouped_runs, explanation batched to run-end, no collapse appears. Under passive_unprompted, aggregate magnitude is a floor artifact, but a recovered logging gap revealed real, model-specific self-monitoring: llama3.1:8b volunteers structured confidence reports unprompted, sometimes eroding its own confidence as trials accumulate; the other two do so only once, as boilerplate. Elicitation structure is a first-class moderator of collapse observability. A companion guaranteed-failure run (72 cells, backfilling rates where random sampling gave zero real failures) shows models differ in whether they recognize an anomaly, distinct from engagement once recognized. Limitation: discrete rate points cannot capture behavior between them, a direction for future work.
Comments: 11 figures. Elicitation-condition sweep across three open-weight models (qwen3:8b, llama3.1:8b, mistral:7b); pipeline scripts and experimental data available upon reasonable request
Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
ACM classes: I.2.0; I.2.6; I.2.7
Cite as: arXiv:2608.13063 [cs.AI]
  (or arXiv:2608.13063v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.13063
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Sam Mao [view email]
[v1] Thu, 13 Aug 2026 10:25:40 UTC (1,665 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled Explanatory Engagement Under Rare Anomalous Failure: Asymptotic Rarity in Model Behavior (or: The Asymptotic AI), by Sam Mao
  • View PDF

Current browse context:

cs.AI
< prev   |   next >
Change to browse by:

References & Citations

Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

loading...
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy Reddit
Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.

Sign in →

No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.

More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language