Not All Errors Are Equal: A Systematic Study of Error Propagation in Large Language Model Inference
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.02430v1
- Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2026 16:04:51 GMT
- Title: Not All Errors Are Equal: A Systematic Study of Error Propagation in Large Language Model Inference
- Abstract summary: We present a comprehensive study on error propagation in large language models (LLMs) inference, enabled by our proposed fault-injection framework.<n>We inject faults across three open-weighted LLMs and thirteen representative tasks, covering reasoning, multilingual, mathematical, and coding domains.<n>Overall, our study yields 17 takeaways that advance the understanding of error propagation in LLM inference.
- Score: 3.160702454918557
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into high-performance computing (HPC) workflows, accelerating scientific discovery through diverse perspectives such as code generation and domain-specific decision-making. Yet, how soft errors propagate and affect LLM inference remains largely unexplored. To bridge this gap, we present a comprehensive study on error propagation in LLM inference, enabled by our proposed LLMFI, a configurable and deterministic fault-injection framework. Using LLMFI, we systematically inject faults across three open-weighted LLMs and thirteen representative tasks, covering reasoning, multilingual, mathematical, and coding domains. In addition, we conduct fine-grained case studies that reveal critical vulnerability patterns. Overall, our study yields 17 takeaways that advance the understanding of error propagation in LLM inference and introduces four low-overhead directions to improve reliability through software-only modification, offering practical guidance for future error detection and mitigation.
Related papers
- How LLMs Fail and Generalize in RTL Coding for Hardware Design? [56.361436215029045]
We introduce a new error taxonomy grounded in problem solvability, inspired by cognitive theory.<n>Our taxonomy categorizes failures into syntactic, semantic, solvable functional, and unsolvable functional types.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-26T14:34:49Z) - A Comprehensive Study on Visual Token Redundancy for Discrete Diffusion-based Multimodal Large Language Models [85.30893355216486]
We study how visual token redundancy evolves with different dMLLM architectures and tasks.<n>Our study reveals that visual redundancy emerges only in from-scratch dMLLMs while handling long-answer tasks.<n>Layer-skipping is promising for accelerating AR-to-diffusion dMLLMs, whereas progressive or late-step pruning is more effective for from-scratch dMLLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-11-19T04:13:36Z) - Self-Correction Distillation for Structured Data Question Answering [50.98882432829651]
Small-scale language models (LLMs) are prone to errors in generating structured queries.<n>We propose a self-correction distillation (SCD) method to improve the structured data QA ability of small-scale LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-11-11T09:01:51Z) - Understanding and Mitigating Errors of LLM-Generated RTL Code [7.747889860813149]
Large language model (LLM) based register-transfer-level (RTL) code generation is promising but the overall success rate remains unsatisfactory.<n>We conduct a comprehensive error analysis and manual categorization.<n>Our findings reveal that most errors stem from insufficient RTL programming knowledge, poor understanding of circuit concepts, or misinterpretation of complex multimodal inputs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-07T11:02:32Z) - Enhancing Long-Chain Reasoning Distillation through Error-Aware Self-Reflection [64.73809794561305]
errOr-aware self-ReflectION (ORION) is a framework that refines teacher CoTs through an Error-Aware Reflection process.<n> Experiments on multiple mathematical reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that ORION consistently improves performance by more than 2% over all baselines.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-28T08:57:03Z) - RvLLM: LLM Runtime Verification with Domain Knowledge [8.15645390408007]
Large language models (LLMs) have emerged as a dominant AI paradigm due to their exceptional text understanding and generation capabilities.<n>Their tendency to generate inconsistent or erroneous outputs challenges their reliability, especially in high-stakes domains requiring accuracy and trustworthiness.<n>Existing research primarily focuses on detecting and mitigating model misbehavior in general-purpose scenarios, often overlooking the potential of integrating domain-specific knowledge.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-24T08:21:44Z) - Error Classification of Large Language Models on Math Word Problems: A Dynamically Adaptive Framework [79.40678802098026]
Math Word Problems serve as a crucial benchmark for evaluating Large Language Models' reasoning abilities.<n>Current error classification methods rely on static and predefined categories.<n>We propose Error-Aware Prompting (EAP) that incorporates common error patterns as explicit guidance.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-01-26T16:17:57Z) - Exploring Automatic Cryptographic API Misuse Detection in the Era of LLMs [60.32717556756674]
This paper introduces a systematic evaluation framework to assess Large Language Models in detecting cryptographic misuses.
Our in-depth analysis of 11,940 LLM-generated reports highlights that the inherent instabilities in LLMs can lead to over half of the reports being false positives.
The optimized approach achieves a remarkable detection rate of nearly 90%, surpassing traditional methods and uncovering previously unknown misuses in established benchmarks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-23T15:31:26Z) - What's Wrong with Your Code Generated by Large Language Models? An Extensive Study [92.62952504133926]
This study evaluated the performance of three leading closed-source LLMs and six popular open-source LLMs on three commonly used benchmarks.<n>We developed a taxonomy of bugs for incorrect codes and analyzed the root cause for common bug types.<n>We propose a novel training-free iterative method that introduces self-critique, enabling LLMs to critique and correct their generated code.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-08T17:27:17Z) - RUPBench: Benchmarking Reasoning Under Perturbations for Robustness Evaluation in Large Language Models [12.112914393948415]
We present RUPBench, a benchmark designed to evaluate large language models (LLMs) across diverse reasoning tasks.
Our benchmark incorporates 15 reasoning datasets, categorized into commonsense, arithmetic, logical, and knowledge-intensive reasoning.
By examining the performance of state-of-the-art LLMs such as GPT-4o, Llama3, Phi-3, and Gemma on both original and perturbed datasets, we provide a detailed analysis of their robustness and error patterns.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-16T17:26:44Z) - An Empirical Study of Automated Vulnerability Localization with Large Language Models [21.84971967029474]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown potential in various domains, yet their effectiveness in vulnerability localization remains underexplored.
Our investigation encompasses 10+ leading LLMs suitable for code analysis, including ChatGPT and various open-source models.
We explore the efficacy of these LLMs using 4 distinct paradigms: zero-shot learning, one-shot learning, discriminative fine-tuning, and generative fine-tuning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-30T08:42:10Z) - Integrating Large Language Model for Improved Causal Discovery [25.50313039584238]
Large Language Models (LLM) have been used for causal analysis across various domain-specific scenarios.<n>We propose an error-tolerant LLM-driven causal discovery framework.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-29T12:48:00Z)
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.