arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.27745

Hearsay or Fact? How Framing and Elicitation Shape LLM Probability Updates

An-Sheng Jhang
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as judgment assistants and as stand-in participants in psychology experiments, yet little is known about how much their probability estimates move in response to a single new piece of information. We pair premise-hypothesis items from $δ$-SNLI with one strengthener and one weakener each, elicit the prior and the posteriors in separate calls, and measure the directional movement s: the mean posterior change signed by the annotated direction, so that the prior cancels out. We vary whether the update is stated ("Here is something else you learned") or reported ("Someone said that"), and whether the model gives one probability or five weighted estimates. We test seven configurations: two local models (Qwen3-8B, OLMo-2-7B; 240 pairs) and five configurations run through agent command-line harnesses (120 pairs), with hypotheses and analysis rules fixed before the formal runs (not publicly registered). Under stated, direct elicitation all seven move in the annotated direction (s = 18-28 percentage points). Reporting lowers s in all seven point estimates (significantly in six, by 2-5 points) and raises the share of reverse movements in all seven: the effect is consistent but small. Five weighted estimates lower the share of responses at $\leq$5% or $\geq$95% in all seven, but in the two local models they also reduce s by 43% and 68%, whereas in the harnessed configurations the point estimates of the change lie between -3.7 and +0.5 points. An elicitation format that reduces extreme values thus need not preserve sensitivity to evidence; the two should be tested separately. Because $δ$-NLI annotates only direction, we make no claim about how large an update should be. Code, data and the frozen plan: https://github.com/asj252/llm-judgment-studies

Explore related subjects

cs.CLcs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

An-Sheng Jhang. 2026-10-20. Hearsay or Fact? How Framing and Elicitation Shape LLM Probability Updates. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.27745

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

MedHal: a Synthetic Dataset for Medical Hallucination Detection

Hallucination, the generation of non factual content by AI systems, poses serious risks in medical contexts, where errors can directly affect patient outcomes. We present MedHal, a large-scale dataset specifically designed to assess capabilities and train models on the task of hallucination detection in medical texts. Current hallucination detection methods face significant limitations when applied to specialized domains like medicine, where they can have disastrous consequences. MedHal addresses this issue by incorporating diverse medical text sources and tasks covering both intrinsic and extrinsic hallucinations, and by providing a substantial volume of data samples suitable for training medical hallucination detection models. We demonstrate MedHal's utility by training and evaluating a baseline medical hallucination detection model, showing improvements over general-purpose hallucination detection approaches. This resource enables more efficient evaluation and training of medical text generation systems while reducing reliance on costly expert review, potentially accelerating the development of medical AI research.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Ask, Answer, and Detect: Role-Playing LLMs for Personality Detection with Question-Conditioned Mixture-of-Experts

Understanding human personality is important for personalized recommendation and mental health assessment. Existing personality detection methods typically encode social media posts into user representations and predict personality labels. Despite advances in large language models (LLMs), these methods face limited supervision from scarce labels and an unclear mapping between user language and psychological constructs. We propose ROME, a framework that incorporates psychological knowledge into personality detection. Inspired by standardized self-assessment tests, ROME uses LLM role-playing to simulate users' responses to validated psychometric questionnaires. These question-level answers provide interpretable, questionnaire-grounded evidence and intermediate supervision. A question-conditioned Mixture-of-Experts module jointly routes post and question representations to predict questionnaire answers under explicit supervision. The predicted answers are aggregated into an interpretable answer vector and fused with user representations for final personality prediction in a multi-task learning framework. Experiments on two real-world datasets show that ROME outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, with relative improvements of 13.60% on Kaggle and 19.72% on Pandora. Code is available at https://github.com/JasmineLyf/ROME.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Clarify or Answer: Reinforcement Learning for Agentic VQA with Context Under-specification

Real-world visual question answering (VQA) may be context-dependent: an image-question pair could be under-specified, such that the correct answer depends on external information that is not observable in the image. In such cases, directly answering can lead to confident but incorrect predictions. We propose Clarify-or-Answer (CoA), an ask-or-answer agent that separately models the decision to ask or answer, and what to ask if needed. CoA first determines whether clarification is necessary; if so, it generates one or more clarification questions to iteratively enrich the context until ambiguity is resolved. To validate this framework, we introduce CONTEXTCLARIFY, a dataset of ambiguous VQA questions along with a contrast set of non-ambiguous questions. We further introduce GRPO-CR(Clarification Reasoning), a reinforcement learning approach that optimizes clarification question generation with multiple reward signals encouraging well-formed, focused, non-trivial questions that resolve ambiguity. Across three VLMs and three datasets, CoA achieves consistent improvements at both the module and system levels, with a single clarification turn providing substantial gains and recursive multi-turn execution offering modest additional improvements in select settings.

cs.CL↗