paper-with-me

홈 › Papers

SAGE: Scalable AI Governance & Evaluation

2026-02-08 · Benjamin Le, Xueying Lu, Nick Stern, Wenqiong Liu, Igor Lapchuk, Xiang Li, Baofen Zheng, Kevin Rosenberg, Jiewen Huang, Zhe Zhang, Abraham Cabangbang, Satej Milind Wagle, Jianqiang Shen, Raghavan Muthuregunathan, Abhinav Gupta, Mathew Teoh, Andrew Kirk, Thomas Kwan, Jingwei Wu, Wenjing Zhang arxiv

Evaluating relevance in large-scale search systems is fundamentally constrained by the governance gap between nuanced, resource-constrained human oversight and the high-throughput requirements of production systems. While traditional approaches rely on engagement proxies or sparse manual review, these methods often fail to capture the full scope of high-impact relevance failures. We present \textbf{SAGE} (Scalable AI Governance \& Evaluation), a framework that operationalizes high-quality human product judgment as a scalable evaluation signal. At the core of SAGE is a bidirectional calibration loop where natural-language \emph{Policy}, curated \emph{Precedent}, and an \emph{LLM Surrogate Judge} co-evolve. SAGE systematically resolves semantic ambiguities and misalignments, transforming subjective relevance judgment into an executable, multi-dimensional rubric with near human-level agreement. To bridge the gap between frontier model reasoning and industrial-scale inference, we apply teacher-student distillation to transfer high-fidelity judgments into compact student surrogates at \textbf{92$\times$} lower cost. Deployed within LinkedIn Search ecosystems, SAGE guided model iteration through simulation-driven development, distilling policy-aligned models for online serving and enabling rapid offline evaluation. In production, it powered policy oversight that measured ramped model variants and detected regressions invisible to engagement metrics. Collectively, these drove a \textbf{0.25\%} lift in LinkedIn daily active users.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX arXiv:2602.07840

Code (0)

등록된 구현이 없습니다.

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

Black-Box Red Teaming of Agentic AI: A Taxonomy-Driven Framework for Automated Risk Discovery

2026-09-09 · Divyanshu Kumar, Nitin Aravind Birur, Tanay Baswa, Sahil Agarwal 외 arxiv

Agentic systems are rapidly moving to production, where they read untrusted inputs, call tools with real permissions, and act autonomously, expanding the security surface beyond chat-only models. Yet standard evaluations…

Red Teaming

Ethical AI Governance: Methods for Evaluating Trustworthy AI

2024-08-28 · Louise McCormack, Malika Bendechache

Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (TAI) integrates ethics that align with human values, looking at their influence on AI behaviour and decision-making. Primarily dependent on self-assessment, TAI evaluation aims to ens…

Decision MakingEthics

AI Governance in Higher Education: Case Studies of Guidance at Big Ten Universities

2024-09-03 · Chuhao Wu, He Zhang, John M. Carroll

Generative AI has drawn significant attention from stakeholders in higher education. As it introduces new opportunities for personalized learning and tutoring support, it simultaneously poses challenges to academic integ…

DAO-AI: Evaluating Collective Decision-Making through Agentic AI in Decentralized Governance

2025-10-24 · Agostino Capponi, Alfio Gliozzo, Chunghyun Han, Junkyu Lee arxiv

This paper presents a first empirical study of agentic AI as autonomous decision-makers in decentralized governance. Using more than 3K proposals from major protocols, we build an agentic AI voter that interprets proposa…

Usage Governance Advisor: From Intent to AI Governance

2024-12-02 · Elizabeth M. Daly, Sean Rooney, Seshu Tirupathi, Luis Garces-Erice 외

Evaluating the safety of AI Systems is a pressing concern for organizations deploying them. In addition to the societal damage done by the lack of fairness of those systems, deployers are concerned about the legal reperc…

Fairness