When Does a Language Model Commit? A Finite-Answer Theory of Pre-Verbalization Commitment

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.06723v1
• Date: Thu, 07 May 2026 08:34:59 GMT
• Title: When Does a Language Model Commit? A Finite-Answer Theory of Pre-Verbalization Commitment
• Abstract summary: Language models often generate reasoning before giving a final answer, but the visible answer does not reveal when the model's answer preference became stable.<n>We study this question through a narrow computable object: emphfinite-answer preference stabilization.<n>For a model state and specified answer verbalizers, we project the model's own continuation probabilities onto a finite answer set.<n>In binary tasks this yields an exact log-odds code, $()=S_(mathrmyesmid)-S_(mathrmnomid
• Score: 6.48455847613423
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Language models often generate reasoning before giving a final answer, but the visible answer does not reveal when the model's answer preference became stable. We study this question through a narrow computable object: \emph{finite-answer preference stabilization}. For a model state and specified answer verbalizers, we project the model's own continuation probabilities onto a finite answer set; in binary tasks this yields an exact log-odds code, $δ(ξ)=S_θ(\mathrm{yes}\midξ)-S_θ(\mathrm{no}\midξ)$. This target defines parser-based answer onset, retrospective stabilization time, and lead without relying on greedy rollouts or learned probes. In controlled delayed-verdict tasks with Qwen3-4B-Instruct, the contextual finite-answer projection stabilizes before the answer is parseable, with 17--31 token mean lead in the main templates and positive, shorter lead in a parser-clean replication. The signal tracks the model's eventual output rather than truth, is linearly recoverable from compact hidden summaries, is partly separable from cursor progress, and transfers as shared information without a single invariant coordinate. Diagnostics separate the measurement from online stopping, verbalizer-free belief, and causal answer control; exact steering shows local sensitivity of $δ$ but not reliable generation control.

Related papers

• How Much is Left? LLMs Linearly Encode Their Remaining Output Length [3.541590945326217]
  Large language models generate one token at a time, yet their responses show remarkably consistent length structure.<n>We ask whether the model carries an internal estimate of how much response remains.<n>We train minimal-capacity linear probes on frozen hidden states of three open-weight 7-8B models across seven completion-style datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-06T16:56:04Z)
• AB-RAG: Adaptive Budgeted Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Reliable Question Answering [0.0]
  AB-RAG is a training-free and backbone-agnostic framework that generates an answer.<n>It estimates its confidence from a combination of three signals.<n>It then decides whether to stop or to retrieve more evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-27T21:08:14Z)
• World Models in Words: Auditing Physical State-Transition Commitments in Vision-Language Models [3.1727619150610837]
  Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly used to answer questions about physical scenes.<n>We introduce wmw, an evaluation framework for auditing the emphlanguage-expressed physical commitments ofVLMs.<n>A hybrid verifier then checks schema validity, state grounding, transition consistency, and answer-trace compatibility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-28T08:29:32Z)
• The Path Matters: Learning a Token-Commitment Policy for Diffusion Language Models [52.93186090124315]
  We argue that token commitment can be learned as a reusable trace-state policy.<n>We introduce TraceLock, a lightweight plug-in controller that instantiates this policy for a frozen diffusion language model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-23T18:23:46Z)
• Survive or Collapse: The Asymmetric Roles of Data Gating and Reward Grounding in Self-Play RL [76.45061154544568]
  Self-play reinforcement learning trains language models on their own generated tasks, co-evolving a proposer and solver without human labels.<n>Recent systems report strong reasoning gains, but collapse and instability are widely observed and poorly understood.<n>We argue instead that self-play stability is governed by two distinct levers: a data-level gate that decides which proposer-generated tasks enter the training pool, and the reward signal that updates the policy on tasks already admitted.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-21T09:19:23Z)
• CopT: Contrastive On-Policy Thinking with Continuous Spaces for General and Agentic Reasoning [22.944748148277146]
  CopT is a reformulated reasoning pipeline that reverses the usual order of thinking and answering.<n>CopT elicits a draft answer and then invokes subsequent on-policy thinking conditioned on its own draft answer.<n>CopT improves peak accuracy by up to 23% and reduces token usage by up to 57% at comparable or higher accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-19T16:28:53Z)
• Paraphrase-Induced Output-Mode Collapse: When LLMs Break Character Under Semantically Equivalent Inputs [0.9525172018746524]
  We observe a systematic failure mode we call prompt-variant output-mode collapse.<n>When a closed-form prompt asks for a bare label or a single choice token, content-preserving prompt variants can push the model into conversational prose.<n>We release PARACONSIST, a benchmark of 150 base queries with five lexical, syntactic, and semantic-expansion prompt variants each.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-06T09:11:10Z)
• Large Language Models Decide Early and Explain Later [47.20810161393936]
  We study the evolution of predicted answers over reasoning steps using forced answer completion.<n>We show that simples, including probe-based stopping, can reduce reasoning token usage by 500 tokens per query.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-24T06:26:24Z)
• Pando: Do Interpretability Methods Work When Models Won't Explain Themselves? [53.07826484214082]
  We introduce Pando, a model-organism benchmark that breaks this confound via an explanation axis.<n>Pando predicts held-out model decisions from $10$ labeled query-response pairs.<n>When explanations are faithful, black-box elicitation matches or exceeds all white-box methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-13T06:42:24Z)
• Reaching Beyond the Mode: RL for Distributional Reasoning in Language Models [78.68818219506313]
  This paper describes a multi-answer reinforcement learning approach for training LMs to perform distributional reasoning over multiple answers during inference.<n>Across question-answering, medical diagnostic, and coding benchmarks, we observe improved diversity, coverage, and set-level calibration scores compared to single answer trained baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-25T22:20:25Z)
• Mechanistic Evidence for Faithfulness Decay in Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [0.0]
  Chain-of-Thought explanations are widely used to interpret how language models solve complex problems.<n>We propose Normalized Logit Difference Decay (NLDD), a metric that measures whether individual reasoning steps are faithful to the model's decision-making process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-04T21:55:57Z)
• Probing the Trajectories of Reasoning Traces in Large Language Models [4.599673637363014]
  We propose a protocol to probe the trajectories of reasoning traces in large language models.<n>We find that accuracy and decision commitment consistently increase as the percentage of provided reasoning tokens grows.<n>We show that trajectory probing provides diagnostics for efficient and safer deployment of reasoning models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-30T16:45:16Z)
• Temporal Predictors of Outcome in Reasoning Language Models [0.0]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) paradigm uses the elicitation of step-by-step rationales as a proxy for reasoning.<n>We show that, for harder questions, a drop in predictive accuracy highlights a selection artifact.<n>Overall, our results imply that for reasoning models, internal self-assessment of success tends to emerge after only a few tokens.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-03T08:57:18Z)
• Catch Your Breath: Adaptive Computation for Self-Paced Sequence Production [55.76222360698305]
  We explore a class of supervised training objectives that allow a language model to dynamically and autonomously scale the number of compute steps used for each input token.<n>For any token, the model can request additional compute steps by emitting a don't know> output.<n>We find that the CYB model requests additional steps when doing so improves accuracy, and the model adapts its processing time to token-level complexity and context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-13T21:07:05Z)
• Enhancing Self-Consistency and Performance of Pre-Trained Language Models through Natural Language Inference [72.61732440246954]
  Large pre-trained language models often lack logical consistency across test inputs. We propose a framework, ConCoRD, for boosting the consistency and accuracy of pre-trained NLP models. We show that ConCoRD consistently boosts accuracy and consistency of off-the-shelf closed-book QA and VQA models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-21T21:58:30Z)
• Robust Question Answering Through Sub-part Alignment [53.94003466761305]
  We model question answering as an alignment problem. We train our model on SQuAD v1.1 and test it on several adversarial and out-of-domain datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-30T09:10:57Z)

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.