Measuring and Improving Behavioral Consistency in Large Language Models through Fact-Heuristic-Emotion State Enforcement

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.24765v1
• Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2026 12:36:36 GMT
• Title: Measuring and Improving Behavioral Consistency in Large Language Models through Fact-Heuristic-Emotion State Enforcement
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) can give different answers to the same decision problem across runs, and reverse a decision when their own prior answer returns as context.<n>We ask whether this instability can be measured and partially reduced without changing model weights.<n>We test the Cognitive Kernel Model (CKM), a prompt-level state-enforcement layer.
• Score: 4.226475360842309
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can give different answers to the same decision problem across runs, and reverse a decision when their own prior answer returns as context. We ask whether this instability can be measured and partially reduced without changing model weights. We test the Cognitive Kernel Model (CKM), a prompt-level state-enforcement layer. Before deciding, the model must separate its input into three epistemic roles: Fact (given or verifiable), Heuristic (inferred or assumed), and Emotion (evaluative or priority signal). CKM adds no capability; it forces the model to track what kind of information it uses before acting. Formally it maintains a structured state S_t = {F_t, H_t, E_t} updated by a transition function. We evaluate CKM on Korean-language decision scenarios (ambiguity, ethical conflict, resource allocation, error handling) across 26 LLMs from four vendors and 37,403 observations, via four core experiments, a 4-arm ablation, a 5-arm sham-restriction ablation, and a temperature probe. Findings: (1) CKM reduces repeated-output variability (random-effects Hedges' g=1.09, 95% CI [0.83, 1.35], 31 model pairs); (2) state persistence cuts the decision-flip rate by 82% in newer models (g=1.52); (3) the effect is not JSON formatting alone (value-only recomputation, g=2.24); (4) intrinsic randomness under fixed anchor states is negligible; (5) the advantage grows under sampling stochasticity (g=2.87 at temperature 0.7); (6) a sham ablation attributes about 45% of the gain to structural scaffolding and 55% to Fact/Heuristic/Emotion content, and CKM is the only arm that both raises consistency and reduces flipping. CKM does not improve reasoning correctness. The narrower result: behavioral consistency is measurable, varies across models, and is partially improvable by forcing models to separate facts, assumptions, and evaluative signals before deciding.

Related papers

• Architecture-Dependent Causal Transfer of Activation States Across Large Language Models [51.56484100374058]
  Internal language activation states can be transferred causally between different large language models.<n>Injecting projected activations into a target model during generation produces a statistically significant, preregistered causal effect.<n>We conclude that end-to-end activation-state transfer between LLMs, as currently implemented, is architecture-dependent rather than universal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-17T09:53:27Z)
• Decomposition of Evidence, Contradiction, and Fragility in Perturbation Responses [1.1162481475388237]
  We introduce DECAF, which routes aligned, opposed, and endpoint-null responses into evidence E, contradiction C, and F.<n>The decomposition preserves ordinary magnitude exactly, Abs = E + C + F, and is unique under endpoint-relative axioms.<n>Changing only the reveal path increases total response by nearly 80%, yet evidence barely changes while fragility grows by more than 4x.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-13T08:13:22Z)
• Accurate Ensembles, Fragile Narratives: Multi-Scale Stacking and a Fidelity Audit of LLM-Generated Explanations for Credit Risk [0.0]
  Credit scoring increasingly relies on models whose decision logic cannot be read off their parameters.<n>A common proposal closes that gap with a language model: compute feature attributions, hand them to an LLM, and let it write the rationale.<n>We build such a system end to end and test whether the second half of the promise holds.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-08T13:22:14Z)
• When Does Few-Shot Prompting Help? A Systematic Empirical Study of Shot-Count Effects Across Model Scale, Architecture, and Output Parsing Robustness [0.0]
  Few-shot prompting, the practice of prepending a small number of input-output demonstration pairs to a query before presenting it to a large language model, is widely adopted in NLP.<n>Yet little systematic work investigates how shot count interacts with model scale, architecture, and output format compliance in classification performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-25T00:31:40Z)
• Distribution-First Population Simulation: Collapse, Calibration, and Recall in Non-WEIRD LLM Persona Modeling [0.0]
  Synthetic-population tools run every individual as an independent large language model (LLM) agent.<n>We show that this paradigm has a basic failure mode, and we set a distribution-first corrective against it.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-17T15:45:57Z)
• Silent Failures in Quantized LLM Reasoning: A Taxonomy-Based Analysis of Hollow Convergence and Failure Mode Shifts [0.0]
  We show that post-training quantization can silently alter how large language models reason even when task accuracy is preserved.<n>We classify 30,000 chain-of-thought outputs from five instruction-tuned LLMs across three quantization precisions.<n>We find that while accuracy is robust across precisions, Hollow Convergence shows a significant size-dependent shift under NF4.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-10T21:55:05Z)
• Understanding and Mitigating Premature Confidence for Better LLM Reasoning [76.16007941549857]
  Long chains of thought (CoT) from current language models frequently contain logical gaps and unjustified leaps.<n>We find such a signal in how the model's confidence evolves during reasoning.<n>We exploit this in progressive confidence shaping, a reinforcement learning objective that trains models to update their confidence as they reason rather than commit early.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-23T04:42:45Z)
• Introspection Fine-Tuning (IFT): Training Small LLMs to Introspect [0.0]
  We investigate whether small language models can detect and report on perturbations their own internal activations.<n>We first show that the binary detection paradigm used in prior work is confounded in small models, as steering biases the model toward affirmative responses regardless of the question content.<n>We then introduce emphIntrospection Fine-Tuning (IFT), supervised fine-tuning on sentence-localization examples constructed from the model's own perturbed forward passes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-08T05:30:26Z)
• Agentic World Modeling for 6G: Near-Real-Time Generative State-Space Reasoning [70.56067503630486]
  We argue that sixth-generation (6G) intelligence is not fluent token prediction but calibrated the capacity to imagine and choose.<n>We show that WM-MS3M cuts mean absolute error (MAE) by 1.69% versus MS3M with 32% fewer parameters and similar latency, and achieves 35-80% lower root mean squared error (RMSE) than attention/hybrid baselines with 2.3-4.1x faster inference.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-04T17:22:22Z)
• Causal Understanding by LLMs: The Role of Uncertainty [43.87879175532034]
  Recent papers show LLMs achieve near-random accuracy in causal relation classification.<n>We investigate whether pretraining exposure to causal examples improves causal understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-24T13:06:35Z)
• Model-free Methods for Event History Analysis and Efficient Adjustment (PhD Thesis) [55.2480439325792]
  This thesis is a series of independent contributions to statistics unified by a model-free perspective.<n>The first chapter elaborates on how a model-free perspective can be used to formulate flexible methods that leverage prediction techniques from machine learning.<n>The second chapter studies the concept of local independence, which describes whether the evolution of one process is directly influenced by another.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-11T19:24:09Z)
• Model Editing with Canonical Examples [75.33218320106585]
  We introduce model editing with canonical examples. A canonical example is a simple instance of good behavior, e.g., The capital of Mauritius is Port Louis. We propose sense finetuning, which selects and finetunes a few sense vectors for each canonical example.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-09T03:08:12Z)
• Confidence-Based Model Selection: When to Take Shortcuts for Subpopulation Shifts [119.22672589020394]
  We propose COnfidence-baSed MOdel Selection (CosMoS), where model confidence can effectively guide model selection. We evaluate CosMoS on four datasets with spurious correlations, each with multiple test sets with varying levels of data distribution shift.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-19T18:48:15Z)
• How Can We Know When Language Models Know? On the Calibration of Language Models for Question Answering [80.82194311274694]
  We examine the question "how can we know when language models know, with confidence, the answer to a particular query?" We examine three strong generative models -- T5, BART, and GPT-2 -- and study whether their probabilities on QA tasks are well calibrated. We then examine methods to calibrate such models to make their confidence scores correlate better with the likelihood of correctness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-02T03:53:13Z)

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.