A Reference-Free Score for Detecting Silent Reasoning Failures in Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.26102v1
• Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 07:28:38 GMT
• Title: A Reference-Free Score for Detecting Silent Reasoning Failures in Large Language Models
• Abstract summary: Reasoning Answer Faithfulness Score (RAFS) is a reference free, instance level diagnostic of whether an emitted mathematical trace is locally credible.<n>RAFS combines step validity, reasoning to answer entailment and counterfactual sensitivity, answer consensus, and conditional reasoning stability.<n>RAFS is intended to complement mathematical answer accuracy with an auditable warning signal for silent reasoning failures and answer extraction errors.
• Score: 1.0602247913671219
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Mathematical chain of thought (CoT) evaluation is commonly reduced to whether the final answer matches a reference. This conflates producing a correct conclusion with producing a valid derivation an invalid chain can accidentally reach the right answer, while a valid calculation can be followed by a transcription error. We call this mismatch the reasoning answer consistency gap. This framework paper introduces the Reasoning Answer Faithfulness Score (RAFS), a reference free, instance level diagnostic of whether an emitted mathematical trace is locally credible, supports its answer, and is stable under resampling and targeted counterfactual interventions. RAFS combines step validity, reasoning to answer entailment and counterfactual sensitivity, answer consensus, and conditional reasoning stability. It evaluates transcript level agreement, not a models private computation and not factual correctness outside the tested mathematical setting. We retain a preregistered, results blind confirmatory study on GSM8K and MATH, with hypotheses, admissibility rules, calibration, and tests fixed before confirmatory outcomes are inspected. A separate feasibility pilot is specified to verify end to end execution and estimate interven tion coverage before that freeze numerical pilot claims are re ported only when trace level artifacts are available. We formalize four reasoning answer outcomes, justify the non compensatory aggregator, instantiate semantic trace distance, quantify compute and abstention tradeoffs, and define verifier independence and power analyses. RAFS is intended to complement mathematical answer accuracy with an auditable warning signal for silent reasoning failures and answer extraction errors

Related papers

• Autoformalizing Argumentative Material Inferences [26.35292656634472]
  We develop an autoformalization for argumentative material inference as guard completion.<n>GUARD yields significant improvements in verified-faithful.<n>We show that the symbolic soft critique and the explicit assumption layer account for most of these gains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-15T11:05:26Z)
• AERA: Adaptive Evidence Residual Allocation for Efficient Test-Time Reasoning [22.964476507912327]
  Test-time scaling improves language-model reasoning by generating additional candidate solutions, but allocating the same inference budget to every problem is computationally wasteful.<n>We show that checkpoint-level correctness evolves non-monotonically, and observable evidence may strengthen before an answer collapses or weaken before it recovers.<n>We introduce Adaptive Evidence Residual Allocation (AERA), a sequential controller that learns whether additional computation is likely to recover a better answer from checkpoint-observable evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-28T06:21:07Z)
• Calibrating Semantic Uncertainty from Observable Language-Model Probabilities [0.0]
  Language models produce probabilities over words, but professional decisions require uncertainty over meaningful states.<n>We introduce a semantic map: a prespecified, testable bridge from probabilities over verbal responses to probabilities over declared states.<n>We derive posterior-error bounds and conditions for existence, uniqueness, stability and sequential Bayesian updating.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-20T00:29:04Z)
• Certified Interventional Fidelity: Anytime-Valid, Adaptive Evaluation of Causal Claims in Mechanistic Interpretability [0.0]
  Certified Interventional Fidelity (CIF) is a statistical layer for interventional interpretability evaluations.<n>CIF certifies high-fidelity claims, shows when apparent method differences are not statistically supported, and makes sensitivity to the intervention distribution explicit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-09T10:55:04Z)
• VGPT-RSI for RH-Adjacent Formal Progress: Boundary Certificates, Verified Finite Lagarias Inequalities, and Explicit Failure Localization [4.067416725742151]
  We apply Verifiable Growing Physical Transformer with Recursive Self-Improvement to two RH-adjacent certification tasks.<n>First, we construct and verify a finite RH-boundary certificate for inequality on a parameterized safe lower curve over a region.<n>Second, we initiate a formal Lagarias-route certificate. Lagarias criterion states that RH is equivalent to the global inequality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-13T04:12:25Z)
• Trust but Verify: Prover-Verifier Deliberation for Selective LLM Prediction [4.273094752480624]
  We introduce prover-verifier deliberation (PVD), an inference-time protocol grounded in interactive proof theory.<n>PVD produces both an answer and a structured confidence verdict, allowing a system to report high-confidence answers while abstaining on uncertain cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-24T15:23:27Z)
• FACT-E: Causality-Inspired Evaluation for Trustworthy Chain-of-Thought Reasoning [49.65751420291115]
  Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has improved LLM reasoning, but models often generate explanations that appear coherent while containing unfaithful intermediate steps.<n>We propose FACT-E, a causality-inspired framework for evaluating CoT quality.<n>We show that FACT-E improves reasoning-trajectory selection and yields stronger in-context learnings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-12T15:35:08Z)
• Correct Answers from Sound Reasoning: Verifiable Process Supervision for Language Models [94.68358825189738]
  We propose a post-training framework for verifiable domains that jointly optimize prediction accuracy and reasoning quality.<n>We evaluate VPS on chess, a controlled testbed where reasoning steps can be deterministically verified against engine signals.<n>VPS preserves accuracy while significantly improving reasoning quality, reducing win-rate error by up to 30% and restoring consistency to near saturation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-03T15:19:46Z)
• Preventing the Collapse of Peer Review Requires Verification-First AI [49.995126139461085]
  We propose truth-coupling, i.e. how tightly venue scores track latent scientific truth.<n>We formalize two forces that drive a phase transition toward proxy-sovereign evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-23T17:17:32Z)
• Latent Veracity Inference for Identifying Errors in Stepwise Reasoning [78.29317733206643]
  We introduce Veracity Search (VS), a discrete search algorithm over veracity assignments.<n>It performs otherwise intractable inference in the posterior distribution over latent veracity values.<n>It generalizes VS, enabling accurate zero-shot veracity inference in novel contexts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-17T04:16:36Z)
• Mitigating LLM Hallucinations via Conformal Abstention [70.83870602967625]
  We develop a principled procedure for determining when a large language model should abstain from responding in a general domain. We leverage conformal prediction techniques to develop an abstention procedure that benefits from rigorous theoretical guarantees on the hallucination rate (error rate) Experimentally, our resulting conformal abstention method reliably bounds the hallucination rate on various closed-book, open-domain generative question answering datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T11:32:03Z)
• Logical Satisfiability of Counterfactuals for Faithful Explanations in NLI [60.142926537264714]
  We introduce the methodology of Faithfulness-through-Counterfactuals. It generates a counterfactual hypothesis based on the logical predicates expressed in the explanation. It then evaluates if the model's prediction on the counterfactual is consistent with that expressed logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-25T03:40:59Z)

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.