Decomposing Wrong-Consensus Agreement in LLM Self-Consistency: A GPT-4.1 Case Study

📅 2026-08-19
📈 Citations: 0
Influential: 0
📄 PDF
🤖 AI Summary
本文通过定义和分解多元同意指数Gamma,量化分析了多数投票在提高LLM答案准确性时可能失效的问题,并以GPT-4.1为例进行了研究。
📝 Abstract
Majority voting over multiple LLM samples is widely used to raise answer accuracy, yet its gain varies erratically: on hard questions it can even backfire. This paper gives a quantitative account of this failure. A pluralistic agreement index Gamma is defined as the expected fraction of the samples of a wrong run that agree with the consensus, normalized by a reference scale d=(1-p)/(C-1), and is decomposed into a mechanical component (what a vote delivers given only a per-case answer preference) and a preference-unexplained residual. The mechanical null is difficulty-matched and leak-free: each case is resimulated at its own accuracy and option preference, estimated from the case's other runs, so no run predicts its own agreement. On GPT-4.1 the decomposition shows benchmark-associated direction (an observational ordering over n=4 cells per benchmark, not a significance claim). On multiple-choice GPQA-Diamond, the per-case answer preference explains 81-93% of the held-out test-run agreement index: the shared-bias-dominates account over-claims here, because a wrong but attractive option the whole cohort latches onto is captured by the per-case preference channel (whether that preference is induced by shared training bias is not identified). On open-domain AIME, the mechanical preference explains only 59-78% (21-29% if shrunk to pure noise), and a preference-unexplained residual of 1.56-2.80 Gamma units survives, which a run-level preference-heterogeneity reference more than absorbs (1.4-2.1). A self-consistency backfire on hard questions is reproduced (binned voting gap down to -0.09, coupled CI [-0.12,-0.07]), and the highest-agreement bin reaches an accuracy of only 0.42-0.83, a 1.2-3.6x lift over base rate: agreement is graded evidence, not certification. No new voting method is proposed; code and evidence are committed and reproducible.
Problem

Research questions and friction points this paper is trying to address.

Majority Voting
LLM Samples
Answer Accuracy
Hard Questions
Backfire
Innovation

Methods, ideas, or system contributions that make the work stand out.

Pluralistic Agreement Index
Mechanical Component
Preference-Unexplained Residual
Majority Voting
GPT-4.1
🔎 Similar Papers
No similar papers found.
💼 Related Jobs
No related jobs found.
L
Lizhuo Zhang
College of Information and Intelligence, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha 410128, China; Yuelushan Laboratory, Changsha 410128, China
M
Mengmeng Tang
College of Information and Intelligence, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha 410128, China
C
Chenfeng Long
College of Information and Intelligence, Hunan Agricultural University, Changsha 410128, China; Yuelushan Laboratory, Changsha 410128, China
X
Xiaoyong Tang
School of Computer Science and Technology, Changsha University of Science and Technology, Changsha 410114, China; Yuelushan Laboratory, Changsha 410128, China
Xiang Luo
Xiang Luo
Nanjing University
Natural Language ProcessingTask-Oriented Dialogue