How Much Does Correctness Cost? Budgeted Placement of Strong Correctors in a Weak Multi-Agent Swarm

A cheap swarm of unreliable agents can be steered to a correct consensus by a few strong, expensive "oracle" correctors. We ask how much one must spend, and where to place the oracles. We model the swarm as a consensus on a graph in which each oracle pins one node toward the truth at a cost-coupled, concave strength, and measure quality by the coherence H(R)=tr M(R)^{-1}. Our first result is that H stays submodular (each added oracle helps less than the last) even when the oracles differ in strength, so a cost-benefit greedy comes within 1-1/e of the best placement at any budget. Inverting the budget gives the budget-correctness frontier B*(eps), the least spend that guarantees an eps-correct consensus: closed-form on the complete graph, and a minimal oracle count k* when oracles cost the same. Whether a budget then buys a few strong oracles or many medium onese curvature of the cost-quality law: diminishing returns favour spreadsharply increasion. Measured onthe Qwen3 ladder (0.6-32B), the law is concave for math verificatio convex foremergent code tracing, so the verdict is genuinely task-dependent.https://github.com/YehudaItkin/budgeted-oracle-placemen

Which Directions Matter? Sparse Design for Affine Robust Optimization

Robust machine learning and optimization rely on the uncertainty model choice. We investigate which uncertainty directions a model must cover when defined by a finite dictionary and a budget constraint. Selecting a subset forms an atomic uncertainty set with a closed form support function, yielding tractable robust programs for affine objectives. We propose a data driven selection rule based on a coverage objective over evaluation directions, including gradients, adversarial perturbations, or shifts observed on held out data. We prove this objective is monotone and submodular, supporting a greedy method with a $(1-1/e)$ approximation guarantee and a matching hardness barrier. We also provide a certificate bounding the loss from the selected subset and a radius calibration rule with out of sample control.

Submodular Benchmark Selection

Evaluating large language models across many benchmarks is expensive, yet many benchmarks are highly correlated. We formalize the selection of a small, informative subset as submodular maximization under a multivariate Gaussian model. Entropy (log-determinant covariance) and mutual information between selected and remaining benchmarks arise as natural objectives. Both are submodular; entropy selection coincides with pivoted Cholesky and has spectral residual bounds, while mutual information is non-monotone in general but empirically monotone for small subsets, so we optimize it greedily. Experiments on three matrices from ten public leaderboards show that mutual information selection outperforms entropy for imputation at small subsets.