multiple-choice

Tag

Cards List
#multiple-choice

Accuracy and Order Sensitivity Diverge Under Label-Free Strategies

arXiv cs.CL · 2026-08-13 Cached

This paper investigates whether label-free strategies for multiple-choice benchmarks can remove option-order sensitivity in large language models, finding that neither two-stage prompting nor independent hypothesis scoring reliably improves accuracy.

0 favorites 0 likes
#multiple-choice

Accuracy and Order Sensitivity Diverge Under Label-Free Strategies

Hugging Face Daily Papers · 2026-08-12 Cached

The paper tests label-free strategies to reduce positional bias in multiple-choice benchmarks but finds they do not reliably improve accuracy or reduce bias. Only showing all options with an LLM matcher preserves baseline performance, while cyclic permutation sometimes helps.

0 favorites 0 likes
#multiple-choice

Every Wrong Answer Counts: Option-Level Psychometrics for LLM Multiple-Choice Benchmarks

arXiv cs.CL · 2026-08-05 Cached

This paper introduces LLM-NRM, an option-level psychometric framework for multiple-choice benchmarks that models the full distribution over answer choices rather than binary correctness, showing that incorrect responses carry useful measurement information and improving ability estimation and benchmarking efficiency.

0 favorites 0 likes
#multiple-choice

Accuracy and Normalized Accuracy under Length Bias: Analysis, Guidelines, and a Bayesian Alternative

arXiv cs.AI · 2026-07-15 Cached

The paper analyzes length bias in likelihood-based multiple-choice evaluation, showing that standard and length-normalized accuracy introduce biases toward shorter and longer answers respectively. It proposes Bayesian accuracy, a scoring rule that uses an explicit prior over answer length to remove linear length effects, demonstrating consistently lower empirical bias across benchmarks.

0 favorites 0 likes
#multiple-choice

The Benchmark Illusion: Pruned LLMs Can Pass Multiple Choice but Fail to Answer

arXiv cs.CL · 2026-06-17 Cached

This paper reveals a 'benchmark illusion' where pruned LLMs perform well on multiple-choice benchmarks but fail to answer the same questions in open generation, suggesting that compressed models should be tested on generative tasks rather than just recognition tasks.

0 favorites 0 likes
#multiple-choice

When No Answer Is Correct: Diagnosing Absent Answer Detection for MLLMs in Video Understanding

arXiv cs.AI · 2026-06-09 Cached

This paper studies the ability of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) to detect when the correct answer is absent in video understanding tasks, finding that models systematically fail by selecting plausible distractors instead of recognizing no valid option exists. The failure worsens in temporal reasoning and dense frame sampling, and chain-of-thought prompting only partially mitigates the issue.

0 favorites 0 likes
#multiple-choice

Response-free item difficulty modelling for multiple-choice items with fine-tuned transformers: Component-wise representation and multi-task learning

arXiv cs.CL · 2026-05-19 Cached

The paper proposes fine-tuning transformer encoders end-to-end for response-free item difficulty modelling of multiple-choice reading comprehension items, with component-wise and multi-task variants, showing that multi-task learning improves in small-sample regimes.

0 favorites 0 likes
#multiple-choice

When Choices Become Risks: Safety Failures of Large Language Models under Multiple-Choice Constraints

arXiv cs.CL · 2026-04-21 Cached

Researchers identify a systematic safety failure in LLMs where reformulating harmful requests as forced-choice multiple-choice questions (MCQs) bypasses refusal behavior, even in models that reject equivalent open-ended prompts. Evaluated across 14 proprietary and open-source models, the study reveals current safety benchmarks substantially underestimate risks in structured decision-making settings.

0 favorites 0 likes
← Back to home

Submit Feedback