REVIEW 1 cited by
The Non-Determinism of Small LLMs: Evidence of Low Answer Consistency in Repetition Trials of Standard Multiple-Choice Benchmarks
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
The Non-Determinism of Small LLMs: Evidence of Low Answer Consistency in Repetition Trials of Standard Multiple-Choice Benchmarks
read the original abstract
This work explores the consistency of small LLMs (2B-8B parameters) in answering multiple times the same question. We present a study on known, open-source LLMs responding to 10 repetitions of questions from the multiple-choice benchmarks MMLU-Redux and MedQA, considering different inference temperatures, small vs. medium models (50B-80B), finetuned vs. base models, and other parameters. We also look into the effects of requiring multi-trial answer consistency on accuracy and the trade-offs involved in deciding which model best provides both of them. To support those studies, we propose some new analytical and graphical tools. Results show that the number of questions which can be answered consistently vary considerably among models but are typically in the 50%-80% range for small models at low inference temperatures. Also, accuracy among consistent answers seems to reasonably correlate with overall accuracy. Results for medium-sized models seem to indicate much higher levels of answer consistency.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Two Confounds in Cross-Model Value Comparison: Response Determinism and the Access Harness
Cross-model value distances from single draws are inflated by response determinism and confounded by the deployment client; a repeated counterbalanced protocol plus flip/magnitude decomposition separates them.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.