Relevance Is Not Permission: Warranted Attention for Value Contributions

Abstract

Relevance is not permission. Attention lets a model read key-value items related to the current query, but it does not guarantee that the value contribution of such an item becomes prediction evidence. A retrieved passage may be relevant to a question without being supporting evidence, and a historical fact or temporal neighbor may even blur true-tail ranking or the current edge score. This paper formalizes this gap as a permission problem for the weighted value term alpha_ij * v_j that is actually added to the prediction path. We propose Warrant, a path-localized interface that preserves attention relevance alpha_ij, exposes the value path leading to the primary metric, and, in the full model, turns alpha_ij * v_j into alpha_ij * g_ij * v_j through learned query-item permission g_ij. We place the same operator on the metric-defining value paths of CTDG link prediction, MTPP next-mark ranking, RAG supporting evidence selection, STPP next-location forecasting, and TKG tail prediction. Across 32 paired comparisons, 3 seeds, and 192 total runs, Warrant improves the primary metric in 27 comparisons; practical tiers consist of 10 substantial effects, 1 marginal effect, 8 positive but uncertain effects, 8 tie/negligible effects, and 5 drops. In the path-localization check, correct-path placement outperforms direction-aware Base performance in every domain and exceeds generic attention placement by +0.1076 AUC in CTDG and +0.0683 MRR in TKG. Ablations show that most TKG gains come from historical-tail value path exposure, whereas the core CTDG gain comes from edge-conditioned query-item permission. In conclusion, prediction evidence is not attention mass. A weighted value term becomes evidence only when it is warranted on the path to the metric.