Event boundaries in continuous video are ambiguous: re-annotate the same query-video pair and independent annotators mark moments that overlap by less than half on a large fraction of samples. The ground truth for video temporal grounding is therefore a distribution over intervals, yet every grounder returns a single interval with no statement of reliability, so at deployment a wrong interval is indistinguishable from a right one. COVER changes the output object: a post-hoc, model-agnostic wrapper that turns any grounder, a trained localizer or a black-box video--language model, into one that emits a temporal region containing the true moment with probability at least $1-\alpha$, by calibrating the quantile of a temporal nonconformity score on held-out labels and widening the base prediction by that amount. The guarantee is finite-sample and distribution-free under exchangeability, and requires neither retraining nor white-box access. We give two score families, a two-sided boundary-widening score for grounders that emit an interval and a super-level-set score for grounders that emit a relevance signal, and develop theory specific to grounding that bounds how large the certified region becomes, when coverage survives conditioning on event length, and how it degrades when moments from one video break exchangeability. Across three benchmarks and five grounders, realized coverage tracks the target, and calibration exposes what point metrics hide.
Aseel Mohamed, Rasul Khanbayov, E. Serpedin et al.· 0 citations
Language models are moving into chemistry and materials discovery workflows, where a wrong molecular formula, space group, or formation energy can silently propagate into downstream decisions. These confabulations hide inside fluent reasoning traces and concentrate on rare, long-tail entities, where model confidence is least trustworthy. Retrieving reference data for every prompt would catch them, but at a heavy coverage and abstention cost. We show that deterministic, database-grounded verification catches and repairs these errors selectively, and that the binding constraint is detection rather than repair. Our tiered verifier extracts each checkable claim, tests it against authoritative databases and physical law, and retrieves a reference value only when a check fails. Across four models and over five hundred prompts with pinned conditions, gated correction cuts the error rate of committed formulas from 22% to 4% with 3.2 times fewer retrievals than blanket augmentation, and it outperforms a conversational retrieval oracle when every answer, corrected or not, is scored. When a flag fires, repair almost always succeeds; the benefit reaches the final answer only where the verifier's scope covers it and where long-tail error exists. Checkable claims, checked cheaply, are a practical lever for trustworthy machine reasoning in chemistry.
Can Polat, Mustafa Kurban, E. Serpedin et al.· 0 citations