paper-with-me

홈 › Papers

Artifacts or Abduction: How Do LLMs Answer Multiple-Choice Questions Without the Question?

2024-02-19 · Nishant Balepur, Abhilasha Ravichander, Rachel Rudinger

Multiple-choice question answering (MCQA) is often used to evaluate large language models (LLMs). To see if MCQA assesses LLMs as intended, we probe if LLMs can perform MCQA with choices-only prompts, where models must select the correct answer only from the choices. In three MCQA datasets and four LLMs, this prompt bests a majority baseline in 11/12 cases, with up to 0.33 accuracy gain. To help explain this behavior, we conduct an in-depth, black-box analysis on memorization, choice dynamics, and question inference. Our key findings are threefold. First, we find no evidence that the choices-only accuracy stems from memorization alone. Second, priors over individual choices do not fully explain choices-only accuracy, hinting that LLMs use the group dynamics of choices. Third, LLMs have some ability to infer a relevant question from choices, and surprisingly can sometimes even match the original question. Inferring the original question is an impressive reasoning strategy, but it cannot fully explain the high choices-only accuracy of LLMs in MCQA. Thus, while LLMs are not fully incapable of reasoning in MCQA, we still advocate for the use of stronger baselines in MCQA benchmarks, the design of robust MCQA datasets for fair evaluations, and further efforts to explain LLM decision-making.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX arXiv:2402.12483

Code (1)

nbalepur/mcqa-artifacts 공식 구현 pytorch

Tasks

Decision MakingMemorizationMultiple-choiceMultiple Choice Question Answering (MCQA)Question Answering

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

Reassessing High-Performing LLMs on Polish Medical Exams: True Competence or Bias-Driven Performance?

2026-06-10 · Antoni Lasik, Jakub Pokrywka, Łukasz Grzybowski, Jeremi Ignacy Kaczmarek 외 arxiv

Large language models (LLMs) in medicine are mainly evaluated using multiple-choice question answering (MCQA), which can overestimate real clinical ability due to guessing strategies and answer biases. To address these l…

Question Answering

MaterialBENCH: Evaluating College-Level Materials Science Problem-Solving Abilities of Large Language Models

2024-09-05 · Michiko Yoshitake, Yuta Suzuki, Ryo Igarashi, Yoshitaka Ushiku 외

A college-level benchmark dataset for large language models (LLMs) in the materials science field, MaterialBENCH, is constructed. This dataset consists of problem-answer pairs, based on university textbooks. There are tw…

Multiple-choice

ABCD: All Biases Come Disguised

2026-02-19 · Mateusz Nowak, Xavier Cadet, Peter Chin arxiv

Multiple-choice question (MCQ) benchmarks have been a standard evaluation practice for measuring LLMs' ability to reason and answer knowledge-based questions. Through a synthetic NonsenseQA benchmark, we observe that dif…

Abstract Spatial-Temporal Reasoning via Probabilistic Abduction and Execution

2021-03-26 · CVPR 2021 1 · Chi Zhang, Baoxiong Jia, Song-Chun Zhu, Yixin Zhu

Spatial-temporal reasoning is a challenging task in Artificial Intelligence (AI) due to its demanding but unique nature: a theoretic requirement on representing and reasoning based on spatial-temporal knowledge in mind, …

AttributeLogical Reasoning

Improving Score Reliability of Multiple Choice Benchmarks with Consistency Evaluation and Altered Answer Choices

2025-11-26 · Paulo Cavalin, Cassia Sanctos, Marcelo Grave, Claudio Pinhanez 외 arxiv

In this work we present the Consistency-Rebalanced Accuracy (CoRA) metric, improving the reliability of Large Language Model (LLM) scores computed on multiple choice (MC) benchmarks. Our metric explores the response cons…

Question Answering