Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Reverse Question Answering: Can an LLM Write a Question so Hard (or Bad) that it Can't Answer?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2410.15512 v2 pith:ZGGFI2NV submitted 2024-10-20 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords questionansweranswersllmsquestionsansweringerrorsaccurate
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Question answering (QA), giving correct answers to questions, is a popular task, but we test reverse question answering (RQA): for an input answer, give a question with that answer. Past work tests QA and RQA separately, but we test them jointly, comparing their difficulty, aiding benchmark design, and checking reasoning consistency. We run 16 LLMs on QA and RQA with trivia questions/answers, revealing: 1) Versus QA, LLMs are much less accurate in RQA for numerical answers, but slightly more accurate in RQA for textual answers; 2) LLMs often answer their own invalid questions from RQA accurately in QA, so RQA errors are not from knowledge gaps alone; 3) RQA errors correlate with question difficulty and inversely correlate with answer frequencies in the Dolma corpus; and 4) LLMs struggle to provide valid multi-hop questions. By finding question and answer types that lead to RQA errors, we suggest improvements for LLM reasoning.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Principled Content Selection to Generate Diverse and Personalized Multi-Document Summaries

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Selecting LLM-extracted key points with a diversity-aware determinantal point process before rewriting improves source coverage in multi-document news summarization.

Pith tools