arXiv AI By Luca Avena, Gianmarco Bet, Bernardo Busoni

How reliable are LLMs when it comes to playing dice?

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2606. 07515v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We investigate the probabilistic reasoning capabilities of large language models through a controlled benchmarking study on discrete probability problems.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Jun 24

Benchmarking LLMs' Mathematical Reasoning with Unseen Random Variables Questions

arXiv:2501. 11790v5 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recent studies have raised significant concerns regarding the reliability of current mathematics benchmarks, highlighting issues such as simplistic design and potential data contamination.

By Zijin Hong, Hao Wu, Su Dong, Junnan Dong, Yilin Xiao, Yujing Zhang, Zhu Wang, Feiran Huang, Linyi Li, Hongxia Yang, Xiao Huang
arXiv AI
4d ago

Probability is Not Enough: Exploring and Counting Divergent Tokens for Reasoning Uncertainty Quantification in LLMs

The paper introduces Divergent Token Confidence (DTC), a method that estimates large language model confidence by counting tokens where two models strongly disagree during decoding. DTC uses Jensen-Shannon divergence between next-token distributions along the same reasoning trajectory and shows a near-negative correlation with answer accuracy. Experiments on multiple model families and six mathematical benchmarks demonstrate that DTC improves calibration over traditional probability-based and verbalized baselines, achieving lower expected calibration errors in both white-box and black-box settings.

By Feiyang Li, Shengjing Liu, Qi Zhan, Sijie Cheng, Weiqing Wang, Hongwen Chen, Yuxuan Yang, Wen Wang, Yile Wang, Hui Huang