cs.CROct 21, 2026

VX-One: Typed, Calibrated Decision Heads for Real-Time Perimeter Triage

Authors: Juan S. Santillana

Organizations: Independent research

Abstract

Perimeter triage faces a latency/semantics trade-off: signature engines are fast and format-safe but blind to unseen attacks, while generative models are semantic but slow and unparseable. We present VX-One, a small multi-head network (100K--10M parameters) with calibrated typed outputs: a binary gate, a closed-set choice with an explicit unknown option where the benchmark supports it (and abstention elsewhere), and an ordinal score. Heads are temperature-calibrated, with 0.7--1.7 ms single-event CPU p50 latency. We evaluate UNSW-NB15, CIC-IDS2017, and EMBER2024 against calibrated XGBoost, Random Forest, MLP, and Kitsune baselines, and measure a Suricata-to-VX-One cascade over five days of CIC-IDS2017. Results are deliberately double-sided: on UNSW the gate ties the best baseline (0.9837+/-0.0002 versus MLP 0.9835+/-0.0013 across three seeds), while VX-One wins temporal CIC detection (0.734+/-0.022 versus 0.639+/-0.027) but loses multi-class attribution to XGBoost. Under leave-one-family-out, the gate detects all nine UNSW families but drops below chance on CIC recon; CIC trees transfer better. Suricata resolves only about 0.1% of attacks on flow reconstructions and 0.2--2.2% on payload-bearing PCAPs; the strictly by-day Phase 2 recovers only the in-scope DoS/DDoS share on the wave day (recall 0.34, precision 0.97). Calibration collapses under temporal drift (ECE 0.04->0.40) for every method while ranking partly survives. We contribute a measured account of where typed calibrated decisions help perimeter triage, and where they fail.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

Sep 24, 2026

Calibrated Decision Models for Autonomous Penetration-Testing Harnesses: JEV and Laya as System One Decision Layers for LLM-Driven Pentest Agents

Autonomous penetration-testing harnesses use large language models (LLMs) for reconnaissance, exploitation, and reporting, but often rely on those same models to confirm findings, grade severity, and select agents. This can lead to false positives, inflated severity, and wasted compute. We examine how System One decision models, lightweight non-generative classifiers that return typed, calibrated verdicts, can support these decisions. We make five contributions. First, we define four decision points: finding adjudication, severity recalibration, agent pruning, and confirmation loops. Second, we present an exploratory NeuroSploit case study comparing one run with TypeSafe System One (Jev) and one without it against a web target containing 13 vulnerabilities. Differences in severity distribution, runtime, and grading by exposed data type motivate the architecture but do not establish statistical significance. Third, we review published specifications for Jev, Jev-Ultrafast, and the open-source Laya without assuming that results from other benchmarks transfer to penetration testing. Fourth, we discuss RLHF, RLAIF, RLCD, and RLHV as training approaches and their implications for trust in security decisions. Finally, we propose Rave, a domain-adapted System One model, and outline its training data, evaluation protocol, and potential effect on harness assurance.
Sep 29, 2026

Benchmarking System One decision models against trained classifiers and language models for automated decision gates

Software that hands branching decisions to a model needs a declared option and a probability it can threshold. Typed decision models, also called System One models, return such probabilities without generating text, while supervised classifiers and generative language models are the established alternatives. One harness sends eight decision-model checkpoints from six families, including the hosted model Jev, and four open generative models from three developers the same semantic requests, and scores trained and zero-shot classifiers on the same workflow, intent, emotion and social-science items. With task labels, a fine-tuned DeBERTa-v3-large has the highest observed accuracy on every labeled benchmark but one. Without labels, no decision model is significantly more accurate than Jev on workflows or intents, but Gemma-4-31B matches it on workflows and exceeds it on CLINC-150 at higher cost and latency. Stated probabilities of generative models become unreadable when replies miss the key format, whereas key likelihoods avoid this but can saturate. A guaranteed 5 percent risk leaves Jev 0.528 of the intent decisions, and an in-scope threshold still accepts 0.310 of out-of-scope requests. On typed-decisions, swapping yes and no flips 50.5 answers per hundred for Jev and at least 16.8 for every generative model tested, against at most 6.5 for four fine-tuned decision checkpoints. Exposure to a benchmark's training data explains the largest lead of an open checkpoint, which vanishes on rater-labeled emotions. An intent-trained first stage escalating to Gemma-4-31B reaches that model's accuracy at about Jev's price. The results yield condition-dependent design rules for automated decision gates.
Oct 2, 2026

SecJev: Bringing Security Expertise to System One Decision Models

Security workflows need models that turn complex observations and explicit policies into decisions. System One models introduced by Jev return typed predictions and probabilities; security specialization supplies the domain expertise behind those predictions. We introduce SecJev, to our knowledge the first family of Jev-style decision models specialized for security, spanning 0.8B to 9B parameters. Built on Kev's single-pass candidate scorer, SecJev learns Boolean, choice, and ordered decisions from text, telemetry, and observation histories. We develop SecJev-Corpus to unify source-label prediction and explicit-policy evaluation across 14 tasks and eight sources. It covers tool outputs, traffic, federated updates, consensus, authentication, and vehicle messages. Scene-weighted training adapts the models across these domains while preserving a shared typed decision interface. Security specialization improves every model in the family; SecJev-0.8B outperforms general Kev-9B by 20.51 percentage points in task-macro accuracy. At 0.8B and 4B, SecJev achieves accuracy and latency close to answer-only generative fine-tuning with lower peak allocated GPU memory. SecJev-4B improves on Kev-4B and security-trained generation in prompt-injection and traffic transfer tests. We release adapters, decision heads, SecJev-Corpus, and training and inference code.