arXiv AI

ICE: Intervention-Consistent Explanation Evaluation with Statistical Grounding for LLMs

The paper introduces ICE (Intervention-Consistent Explanation), a framework that evaluates the faithfulness of large language model explanations by comparing them to random baselines of equal size across multiple intervention operators. It demonstrates that faithfulness varies with the chosen operator, with significant differences observed when switching between deletion and retrieval infill operators. The study evaluates seven LLMs on four tasks, revealing that operator changes can cross the positive-evidence threshold in 18% of configurations and that random baselines uncover anti-faithfulness in nearly a third of English deletion setups, findings that also hold across six non‑English languages and two attribution methods.

arXiv AI
Aug 17

The Metacognitive Bottleneck: Japanese Riddles Reveal Fundamental Limits of Machine Insight and Self-Evaluation in Reasoning AI

arXiv:2509. 14704v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Benchmark saturation and training-data contamination increasingly obscure whether reported gains in large language models (LLMs) reflect genuine advances in reasoning or familiarity with recurring patterns in benchmark problems.

By Masaharu Mizumoto, Dat Nguyen, Zhiheng Han, Xingfu Li, Yo Nakawake, Le Minh Nguyen
arXiv AI
Jul 15

Rethinking Reward Models for Multi-Domain Test-Time Scaling

arXiv:2510. 00492v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The reliability of large language models (LLMs) during test-time scaling is often assessed with \emph{external verifiers} or \emph{reward models} that distinguish correct reasoning from flawed logic.

By Dong Bok Lee, Seanie Lee, Sangwoo Park, Minki Kang, Jinheon Baek, Dongki Kim, Dominik Wagner, Jiongdao Jin, Heejun Lee, Tobias Bocklet, Jinyu Wang, Jingjing Fu, Sung Ju Hwang, Jiang Bian, Lei Song