Normative rules like institutional charters and workplace policies must be both human-readable and operationally verifiable against actual environment records. However, current language generation and structured-output benchmarks primarily reward surface fluency or schema compliance, leaving operational grounding weakly tested. This creates a critical vulnerability where standard language models generate plausible-sounding policies that fail during enforcement because they rely on unavailable data logs or misaligned scopes. To address this challenge, we formalize the problem as Grounded Normative Rule Synthesis (GNRS) and introduce GNRS-Search, a framework that utilizes Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling to optimize a discrete, five-slot And-Or Graph (AOG). By explicitly decoupling intermediate operational structure from final prose generation, this method isolates executable feasibility from writing style and allows rule failures to be localized prior to surface realization. We evaluate our approach on GNRS-Bench, a benchmark spanning 116 controlled goals across eight scene families, and RealCharter-Bench, which evaluates transfer to 53 real-derived policy tasks with hidden source clauses. GNRS-Search raises average rubric quality from 68.8% to 81.0% and ranks first under a disclosed executable composite metric, while systematic slot interventions confirm that performance gains stem from robust operational logic rather than rhetorical tuning. Ultimately, by transforming automated rule drafting into an inspectable search problem, this work provides a foundational paradigm for deploying verifiable and compliance-ready personal agents within regulated environments.
Reference-free faithfulness metrics verify each atomic claim a model makes against ground truth, and are increasingly used to evaluate grounded generation. We show they share a blind spot: they measure only precision -- are the stated claims supported? -- and therefore reward abstention, since a model can score near-perfect faithfulness by saying almost nothing. We make this measurable using Formula 1 telemetry, a domain where strategic ground truth is derived deterministically and, crucially, completely: for each decision we know the full set of facts that mattered. This completeness -- absent in open-domain faithfulness benchmarks -- lets us measure recall (coverage of the relevant facts) exactly, alongside precision. On a multilingual (EN/ES/PT) benchmark of 7,253 decision instances spanning 150 races, the most precise frontier model covers under half of the relevant facts and ranks last by F1, so requiring coverage reorders the systems; the same effect reappears in a second complete-oracle domain (NOAA weather forecasts). A prompt ablation shows the low coverage is not an under-prompting artifact: explicitly asking models to be thorough does not close the gap. We pair faithfulness with coverage into a single score, validate the metric (controlled perturbation; agreement across a model-free regex extractor and a cross-family LLM extractor, system-level Spearman 1.0), and give a verifier-guided generation method that improves precision and recall without references. We release the benchmark, structured annotations, metric, baselines, and an interactive demo.
Ria Mundhra, Gustavo Sato dos Santos, Michael Benediktcs.AI
Time series forecasts are widely used in decision-critical domains, where they are rarely consumed without accompanying explanations. Producing such explanations is usually a manual and costly process, and attempts to automate it using large language models often suffer from hallucination when applied to temporal data. We propose a domain-agnostic framework for grounded natural language explanation generation for time series forecasts, illustrated in Figure 1. The framework consists of three components: (i) extraction of structured explanatory factors from historical analyst-written explanations, (ii) evidence-conditioned explanation generation, and (iii) scalable evaluation for readability, logical consistency, and persuasiveness. The design explicitly constrains generation to verifiable evidence, reducing unsupported claims. We evaluate the framework on a financial forecasting case study involving the NASDAQ-100 index and a freight pricing case study using data from Vortexa. Results show that generated explanations approached analyst-written explanations in terms of readability, consistency and persuasiveness. These findings demonstrate that grounded explanation generation for time series forecasting can be achieved at scale without domain-specific fine-tuning.