A Closer Look at Bias and Chain-of-Thought Faithfulness of Large (Vision) Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.23945v1
• Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 18:55:05 GMT
• Title: A Closer Look at Bias and Chain-of-Thought Faithfulness of Large (Vision) Language Models
• Authors: Sriram Balasubramanian, Samyadeep Basu, Soheil Feizi,
• Abstract summary: Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning enhances performance of large language models.<n>We present the first comprehensive study of CoT faithfulness in large vision-language models.
• Score: 53.18562650350898
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning enhances performance of large language models, but questions remain about whether these reasoning traces faithfully reflect the internal processes of the model. We present the first comprehensive study of CoT faithfulness in large vision-language models (LVLMs), investigating how both text-based and previously unexplored image-based biases affect reasoning and bias articulation. Our work introduces a novel, fine-grained evaluation pipeline for categorizing bias articulation patterns, enabling significantly more precise analysis of CoT reasoning than previous methods. This framework reveals critical distinctions in how models process and respond to different types of biases, providing new insights into LVLM CoT faithfulness. Our findings reveal that subtle image-based biases are rarely articulated compared to explicit text-based ones, even in models specialized for reasoning. Additionally, many models exhibit a previously unidentified phenomenon we term ``inconsistent'' reasoning - correctly reasoning before abruptly changing answers, serving as a potential canary for detecting biased reasoning from unfaithful CoTs. We then apply the same evaluation pipeline to revisit CoT faithfulness in LLMs across various levels of implicit cues. Our findings reveal that current language-only reasoning models continue to struggle with articulating cues that are not overtly stated.

Related papers

• Deep Hidden Cognition Facilitates Reliable Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [33.30315111732609]
  Chain of Thought (CoT) reasoning has demonstrated remarkable deep reasoning capabilities.<n>However, its reliability is often undermined by the accumulation of errors in intermediate steps.<n>This paper introduces an approach to calibrate the CoT reasoning accuracy by leveraging the model's intrinsic veracity encoding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-14T07:41:35Z)
• A Survey on Latent Reasoning [100.54120559169735]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive reasoning capabilities.<n>CoT reasoning that verbalizes intermediate steps limits the model's expressive bandwidth.<n>Latent reasoning tackles this bottleneck by performing multi-step inference entirely in the model's continuous hidden state.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-08T17:29:07Z)
• Unveiling Confirmation Bias in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [12.150655660758359]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting has been widely adopted to enhance the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs)<n>This work presents a novel perspective to understand CoT behavior through the lens of textitconfirmation bias in cognitive psychology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-14T01:30:17Z)
• The CoT Encyclopedia: Analyzing, Predicting, and Controlling how a Reasoning Model will Think [81.38614558541772]
  We introduce the CoT Encyclopedia, a framework for analyzing and steering model reasoning.<n>Our method automatically extracts diverse reasoning criteria from model-generated CoTs.<n>We show that this framework produces more interpretable and comprehensive analyses than existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-15T11:31:02Z)
• Causality can systematically address the monsters under the bench(marks) [64.36592889550431]
  Benchmarks are plagued by various biases, artifacts, or leakage.<n>Models may behave unreliably due to poorly explored failure modes.<n> causality offers an ideal framework to systematically address these challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T17:01:37Z)
• Reasoning Beyond Bias: A Study on Counterfactual Prompting and Chain of Thought Reasoning [0.0]
  We show that differences in learned regularities across answer options are predictive of model preferences and mirror human test-taking strategies. We introduce two novel methods: Counterfactual Prompting with Chain of Thought (CoT) and Counterfactual Prompting with Agnostically Primed CoT (APriCoT) Our results suggest that mitigating bias requires a "System-2" like process and that CoT reasoning is susceptible to confirmation bias under some prompting methodologies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-16T10:34:50Z)
• Covert Bias: The Severity of Social Views' Unalignment in Language Models Towards Implicit and Explicit Opinion [0.40964539027092917]
  We evaluate the severity of bias toward a view by using a biased model in edge cases of excessive bias scenarios. Our findings reveal a discrepancy in LLM performance in identifying implicit and explicit opinions, with a general tendency of bias toward explicit opinions of opposing stances. The direct, incautious responses of the unaligned models suggest a need for further refinement of decisiveness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-15T15:23:00Z)
• Distributional Associations vs In-Context Reasoning: A Study of Feed-forward and Attention Layers [49.80959223722325]
  We study the distinction between feed-forward and attention layers in large language models.<n>We find that feed-forward layers tend to learn simple distributional associations such as bigrams, while attention layers focus on in-context reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T08:51:08Z)
• Calibrating Reasoning in Language Models with Internal Consistency [18.24350001344488]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in various reasoning tasks.<n>LLMs often generate text with obvious mistakes and contradictions.<n>In this work, we investigate reasoning in LLMs through the lens of internal representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T02:44:12Z)
• Predictive Churn with the Set of Good Models [61.00058053669447]
  This paper explores connections between two seemingly unrelated concepts of predictive inconsistency.<n>The first, known as predictive multiplicity, occurs when models that perform similarly produce conflicting predictions for individual samples.<n>The second concept, predictive churn, examines the differences in individual predictions before and after model updates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-12T16:15:25Z)
• Logical Satisfiability of Counterfactuals for Faithful Explanations in NLI [60.142926537264714]
  We introduce the methodology of Faithfulness-through-Counterfactuals. It generates a counterfactual hypothesis based on the logical predicates expressed in the explanation. It then evaluates if the model's prediction on the counterfactual is consistent with that expressed logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-25T03:40:59Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.