SCOPE: Stochastic and Counterbiased Option Placement for Evaluating Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.18182v2
• Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2025 15:53:52 GMT
• Title: SCOPE: Stochastic and Counterbiased Option Placement for Evaluating Large Language Models
• Authors: Wonjun Jeong, Dongseok Kim, Taegkeun Whangbo,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) can achieve inflated scores on multiple-choice tasks by exploiting inherent biases in option positions or labels.<n>This study introduces SCOPE, an evaluation framework designed to measure and mitigate such selection bias in a dataset-independent manner.
• Score: 0.27309692684728604
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) can achieve inflated scores on multiple-choice tasks by exploiting inherent biases in option positions or labels, rather than demonstrating genuine understanding. This study introduces SCOPE, an evaluation framework designed to measure and mitigate such selection bias in a dataset-independent manner. By repeatedly invoking a null prompt that lacks semantic content, SCOPE estimates each model's unique position-bias distribution. It then redistributes the answer slot according to the inverse-bias distribution, thereby equalizing the lucky-rate, the probability of selecting the correct answer by chance. Furthermore, it prevents semantically similar distractors from being placed adjacent to the answer, thereby blocking near-miss guesses based on superficial proximity cues. Across multiple benchmark experiments, SCOPE consistently outperformed existing debiasing methods in terms of stable performance improvements and showed clearer confidence distributions over correct options. This framework thus offers a new standard for enhancing the fairness and reliability of LLM evaluations.

Related papers

• Scalable Best-of-N Selection for Large Language Models via Self-Certainty [65.31658824274894]
  Best-of-N selection is a key technique for improving the reasoning performance of Large Language Models.<n>We propose self-certainty, a novel and efficient metric to estimate response quality without requiring external reward models.<n>Our findings establish self-certainty as a practical and efficient way for improving LLM reasoning capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-25T19:08:07Z)
• CalibraEval: Calibrating Prediction Distribution to Mitigate Selection Bias in LLMs-as-Judges [21.580762639442913]
  We introduce CalibraEval, a novel label-free method for mitigating selection bias during inference. CalibraEval reformulates debiasing as an optimization task aimed at adjusting observed prediction distributions to align with unbiased prediction distributions. We show that CalibraEval effectively mitigates selection bias and improves performance compared to existing debiasing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-20T13:47:39Z)
• Mitigating Selection Bias with Node Pruning and Auxiliary Options [11.835002896308545]
  Large language models (LLMs) often exhibit systematic preferences for certain answer choices when responding to multiple-choice questions.<n>This bias reduces the accuracy and reliability of LLM outputs, limiting their usefulness in decision-critical applications.<n>We introduce two methods: Bias Node Pruning (BNP), which prunes parameters that contribute to selection bias, and Auxiliary Option Injection (AOI), which introduces an answer choice to reduce bias in both white-box and black-box settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-27T15:53:54Z)
• Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations [53.15438489398938]
  Large language models (LLMs) can reach and even surpass human-level accuracy on a variety of benchmarks, but their overconfidence in incorrect responses is still a well-documented failure mode. We propose a framework for measuring an LLM's uncertainty with respect to the distribution of generated explanations for an answer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T16:35:30Z)
• Rejection via Learning Density Ratios [50.91522897152437]
  Classification with rejection emerges as a learning paradigm which allows models to abstain from making predictions.<n>We propose a different distributional perspective, where we seek to find an idealized data distribution which maximizes a pretrained model's performance.<n>Our framework is tested empirically over clean and noisy datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T01:32:17Z)
• Pseudo Label Selection is a Decision Problem [0.0]
  Pseudo-Labeling is a simple and effective approach to semi-supervised learning. It requires criteria that guide the selection of pseudo-labeled data. Overfitting can be propagated to the final model by choosing instances with overconfident but wrong predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-25T07:48:02Z)
• Large Language Models Are Not Robust Multiple Choice Selectors [117.72712117510953]
  Multiple choice questions (MCQs) serve as a common yet important task format in the evaluation of large language models (LLMs) This work shows that modern LLMs are vulnerable to option position changes due to their inherent "selection bias" We propose a label-free, inference-time debiasing method, called PriDe, which separates the model's prior bias for option IDs from the overall prediction distribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-07T17:44:56Z)
• Correcting Underrepresentation and Intersectional Bias for Classification [49.1574468325115]
  We consider the problem of learning from data corrupted by underrepresentation bias. We show that with a small amount of unbiased data, we can efficiently estimate the group-wise drop-out rates. We show that our algorithm permits efficient learning for model classes of finite VC dimension.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-19T18:25:44Z)
• Robust Outlier Rejection for 3D Registration with Variational Bayes [70.98659381852787]
  We develop a novel variational non-local network-based outlier rejection framework for robust alignment. We propose a voting-based inlier searching strategy to cluster the high-quality hypothetical inliers for transformation estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-04T03:48:56Z)
• ADEPT: A DEbiasing PrompT Framework [64.54665501064659]
  Finetuning is an applicable approach for debiasing contextualized word embeddings.<n> discrete prompts with semantic meanings have shown to be effective in debiasing tasks.<n>We propose ADEPT, a method to debias PLMs using prompt tuning while maintaining the delicate balance between removing biases and ensuring representation ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-10T08:41:40Z)
• ReCAB-VAE: Gumbel-Softmax Variational Inference Based on Analytic Divergence [17.665255113864795]
  We present a novel divergence-like metric which corresponds to the upper bound of the Kullback-Leibler divergence (KLD) of a relaxed categorical distribution. We also propose a relaxed categorical analytic bound variational autoencoder (ReCAB-VAE) that successfully models both continuous and relaxed latent representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-09T08:11:46Z)

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.