Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Semantic Consistency for Assuring Reliability of Large Language Models

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 2308.09138 v2 pith:75HNDYYE submitted 2023-08-17 cs.CL cs.AIcs.CY

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.CY
keywords consistencyllmssemanticlanguagemetricsmodelsevaluationslarge
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit remarkable fluency and competence across various natural language tasks. However, recent research has highlighted their sensitivity to variations in input prompts. To deploy LLMs in a safe and reliable manner, it is crucial for their outputs to be consistent when prompted with expressions that carry the same meaning or intent. While some existing work has explored how state-of-the-art LLMs address this issue, their evaluations have been confined to assessing lexical equality of single- or multi-word answers, overlooking the consistency of generative text sequences. For a more comprehensive understanding of the consistency of LLMs in open-ended text generation scenarios, we introduce a general measure of semantic consistency, and formulate multiple versions of this metric to evaluate the performance of various LLMs. Our proposal demonstrates significantly higher consistency and stronger correlation with human evaluations of output consistency than traditional metrics based on lexical consistency. Finally, we propose a novel prompting strategy, called Ask-to-Choose (A2C), to enhance semantic consistency. When evaluated for closed-book question answering based on answer variations from the TruthfulQA benchmark, A2C increases accuracy metrics for pretrained and finetuned LLMs by up to 47%, and semantic consistency metrics for instruction-tuned models by up to 7-fold.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Visual hallucination detection in large vision-language models via evidential conflict

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A feature-level evidential conflict score detects incorrect and hallucinated answers in large vision-language models, and a new PRE-HAL benchmark exposes frequent relation-reasoning failures.

  2. How does Misinformation Affect Large Language Model Behaviors and Preferences?

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    MisBench provides a 10.3M-example benchmark of styled, conflict-based misinformation and shows LLMs' detection accuracy depends strongly on conflict type and textual style.

Pith tools