CHOIR: Collaborative Harmonization fOr Inference Robustness

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.22475v1
• Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2025 01:20:24 GMT
• Title: CHOIR: Collaborative Harmonization fOr Inference Robustness
• Abstract summary: Persona-assigned Large Language Models (LLMs) can adopt diverse roles, enabling personalized and context-aware reasoning.<n>Minor demographic perturbations in personas, such as simple pronoun changes, can alter reasoning trajectories, leading to divergent sets of correct answers.<n>We propose CHOIR, a test-time framework that harmonizes multiple persona-conditioned reasoning signals into a unified prediction.
• Score: 25.458744810976672
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Persona-assigned Large Language Models (LLMs) can adopt diverse roles, enabling personalized and context-aware reasoning. However, even minor demographic perturbations in personas, such as simple pronoun changes, can alter reasoning trajectories, leading to divergent sets of correct answers. Instead of treating these variations as biases to be mitigated, we explore their potential as a constructive resource to improve reasoning robustness. We propose CHOIR (Collaborative Harmonization fOr Inference Robustness), a test-time framework that harmonizes multiple persona-conditioned reasoning signals into a unified prediction. CHOIR orchestrates a collaborative decoding process among counterfactual personas, dynamically balancing agreement and divergence in their reasoning paths. Experiments on various reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that CHOIR consistently enhances performance across demographics, model architectures, scales, and tasks - without additional training. Improvements reach up to 26.4% for individual demographic groups and 19.2% on average across five demographics. It remains effective even when base personas are suboptimal. By reframing persona variation as a constructive signal, CHOIR provides a scalable and generalizable approach to more reliable LLM reasoning.

Related papers

• One Model, Multiple Goals: Adaptive Multi-Objective Learning for E-commerce Dialogue Systems [33.515535808117775]
  We propose MORE, an adaptive Multi-Objective REinforcement learning framework.<n> MORE jointly optimize reasoning accuracy and linguistic naturalness.<n>We evaluate MORE on two real-world dialogue systems at ByteDance and the MultiWOZ 2.2 benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-08T10:01:07Z)
• Aligning LLM Uncertainty with Human Disagreement in Subjectivity Analysis [57.78407973423517]
  We advocate uncertainty-aware subjectivity analysis, where models are expected to make predictions while expressing uncertainty that reflects human disagreement.<n>To operationalize this perspective, we propose a two-phase Disagreement Perception and Uncertainty Alignment framework.<n> Experiments on three subjectivity analysis tasks show that DPUA preserves task performance while better aligning model uncertainty with human disagreement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-11T11:52:58Z)
• Adaptive Robust Estimator for Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning [27.595086716369483]
  We propose a robust multi-agent reinforcement learning framework for collaborative reasoning.<n>It consists of two components: Dual-Agent Answer-Critique-Rewrite (DACR) and an Adaptive Robust Estimator (ARE)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-23T04:51:15Z)
• Balancing Faithfulness and Performance in Reasoning via Multi-Listener Soft Execution [79.98699884805636]
  Reasoning Execution by Multiple Listeners (REMUL) is a multi-party reinforcement learning approach.<n>REMUL builds on the hypothesis that reasoning traces which other parties can follow will be more faithful.<n>Speakers are rewarded for producing reasoning that is clear to listeners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-18T02:55:55Z)
• Consistently Simulating Human Personas with Multi-Turn Reinforcement Learning [52.07170679746533]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to simulate human users in interactive settings such as therapy, education, and social role-play.<n>We introduce a unified framework for evaluating and improving persona consistency in LLM-generated dialogue.<n>We define three automatic metrics: prompt-to-line consistency, line-to-line consistency, and Q&A consistency, that capture different types of persona drift and validate each against human annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-31T19:40:41Z)
• From <Answer> to <Think>: Multidimensional Supervision of Reasoning Process for LLM Optimization [62.07990937720985]
  Dimension-level Reward Model (DRM) is a new supervision framework for Large Language Models.<n>DRM evaluates the quality of a reasoning process along three fundamental, complementary, and interpretable dimensions.<n> Experimental results show that DRM provides effective supervision signals, guides the optimization of LLMs and enhances their reasoning ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-13T14:29:15Z)
• Mitigating Spurious Correlations Between Question and Answer via Chain-of-Thought Correctness Perception Distillation [25.195244084313114]
  Chain-of-Thought Correctness Perception Distillation (CoPeD) aims to improve the reasoning quality of the student model.<n>CoPeD encourages the student model to predict answers based on correct rationales and revise them when they are incorrect.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-06T05:33:17Z)
• Fractional Reasoning via Latent Steering Vectors Improves Inference Time Compute [60.151643048803145]
  We propose Fractional Reasoning, a framework that enables continuous control over reasoning intensity at inference time.<n>Our method operates by extracting the latent steering vector associated with deeper reasoning and reapplying it with a tunable scaling factor.<n> Experiments on GSM8K, MATH500, and GPQA demonstrate that Fractional Reasoning consistently improves performance across diverse reasoning tasks and models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-18T21:15:59Z)
• Two Minds Better Than One: Collaborative Reward Modeling for LLM Alignment [35.80989342492335]
  noisy preferences in human feedback can lead to reward misgeneralization.<n>This paper aims to identify how noisy preferences differ from human-aligned preferences in reward modeling.<n>We propose an online Collaborative Reward Modeling framework to achieve robust preference learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-15T10:58:20Z)
• Beyond Reward Hacking: Causal Rewards for Large Language Model Alignment [30.605500809158986]
  We propose a novel causal reward modeling approach that integrates causality to mitigate spurious correlations.<n>Our approach mitigates various types of spurious correlations effectively, resulting in more reliable and fair alignment of LLMs with human preferences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-16T16:00:37Z)
• Personalizing Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with Variational Preference Learning [12.742158403867002]
  Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback is a powerful paradigm for aligning foundation models to human values and preferences. Current RLHF techniques cannot account for the naturally occurring differences in individual human preferences across a diverse population. We develop a class of multimodal RLHF methods to address the need for pluralistic alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-19T15:18:30Z)
• MaxMin-RLHF: Alignment with Diverse Human Preferences [101.57443597426374]
  Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) aligns language models to human preferences by employing a singular reward model derived from preference data.<n>We learn a mixture of preference distributions via an expectation-maximization algorithm to better represent diverse human preferences.<n>Our algorithm achieves an average improvement of more than 16% in win-rates over conventional RLHF algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-14T03:56:27Z)
• Improving Language Models Meaning Understanding and Consistency by Learning Conceptual Roles from Dictionary [65.268245109828]
  Non-human-like behaviour of contemporary pre-trained language models (PLMs) is a leading cause undermining their trustworthiness. A striking phenomenon is the generation of inconsistent predictions, which produces contradictory results. We propose a practical approach that alleviates the inconsistent behaviour issue by improving PLM awareness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-24T06:15:15Z)
• HANS, are you clever? Clever Hans Effect Analysis of Neural Systems [1.6267479602370545]
  Large Language Models (It-LLMs) have been exhibiting outstanding abilities to reason around cognitive states, intentions, and reactions of all people involved, letting humans guide and comprehend day-to-day social interactions effectively. Several multiple-choice questions (MCQ) benchmarks have been proposed to construct solid assessments of the models' abilities. However, earlier works are demonstrating the presence of inherent "order bias" in It-LLMs, posing challenges to the appropriate evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-21T20:52:18Z)

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.