TrAC: Trace-Conditioned Answer Consistency for Efficient Uncertainty Quantification in LLMs
Large language models (LLMs) can generate fluent reasoning traces that nevertheless lead to incorrect answers, making response-level uncertainty estimation important for abstention, human review, and adaptive compute allocation. Existing approaches generally fall into three categories: passive single-trace methods use token-level confidence signals, sampling-based methods compare multiple complete traces at higher generation cost, and active prefix-based methods probe partial traces to study answer stabilization or preference transitions. However, none actively re-elicits an answer from a completed reasoning trace to measure its consistency with and support for the original answer. To address this gap, we introduce Trace-Conditioned Answer Consistency (TrAC), a correctness-supervised uncertainty quantification framework that combines active and passive signals anchored to one completed reasoning trace. Its active component, Prefix-Conditioned Elicitation (PCE), re-elicits a short answer conditioned on the completed trace and represents both its consistency with the original answer and its token-level probabilistic support. Its passive component, Trace Uncertainty Profile (TUP), summarizes how token-level uncertainty evolves throughout the original generation without additional decoding. A lightweight head then integrates the two representations into a response-correctness score. Across five mathematical reasoning benchmarks and three LLM families, TrAC improves macro AUROC by 1.8% and reduces AURC by 3.4% relative to eight-sample self-consistency, while using one complete reasoning trace and a short cached answer probe. When eight samples are already available, augmenting sample consensus with re-elicitation further improves macro AUROC by 4.3% and reduces AURC by 8.3%, without additional full-trace generation.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Mathematical ReasoningSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Joint Evaluation of Answer and Reasoning Consistency for Hallucination Detection in Large Reasoning Models
Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) extend large language models with explicit, multi-step reasoning traces to enhance transparency and performance on complex tasks. However, these reasoning traces can be redundant or logicall…
DiagnosticHallucinationThe Cost of Reasoning: Chain-of-Thought Induces Overconfidence in Vision-Language Models
Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes settings where reliable uncertainty quantification (UQ) is as important as predictive accuracy. Extended reasoning via chain-of-thought (CoT) prompti…
MARS: Margin-Adversarial Risk-controlled Stopping for Parallel LLM Test-time Scaling
Parallel test-time scaling samples many reasoning traces and majority-votes their answers, improving LLM accuracy but requiring traces to run to completion, incurring substantial computational overhead. We observe that p…
Do I Really Know? Learning Factual Self-Verification for Hallucination Reduction
Factual hallucination remains a central challenge for large language models (LLMs). Existing mitigation approaches primarily rely on either external post-hoc verification or mapping uncertainty directly to abstention dur…
Boosting Self-Consistency with Ranking
Self-consistency improves large language models by sampling multiple reasoning paths and selecting the most frequent answer, but majority voting often fails to recover correct answers that are already present among the s…
Question AnsweringAnswer Selection