Consilience for Verifier-Free Test-Time Scaling
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2608.09898v1
- Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2026 17:45:44 GMT
- Title: Consilience for Verifier-Free Test-Time Scaling
- Abstract summary: Verifier-free test-time scaling (or VF-TTS) is gaining extensive attention as a mechanism to enhance Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning.<n>We introduce consilience, a novel selection framework that explicitly evaluates the temporal asymmetry of confidence in reasoning.
- Score: 17.772780906204787
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Test-time scaling often uses an external verifier, such as compilers and test cases in coding or trained value functions in robotics applications, to obtain high-quality rollouts. Verifier-free test-time scaling (or VF-TTS) is gaining extensive attention as a mechanism to enhance Large Language Model (LLM) reasoning, primarily because we do not have access to such high-quality verifiers in many real-world applications. Among existing VF-TTS methods, confidence-based VF-TTS methods, which compute and rank rollouts solely by confidence, are particularly promising. Such methods introduce near-zero overhead for sample evaluation and require minimal access to internal model states, making the methods highly flexible across models and tasks. In this paper, we demonstrate a critical limitation of existing confidence-based VF-TTS methods by showing that such methods catastrophically break down on complex tasks. We observe a very interesting phenomenon: uniformly high confidence frequently indicates a failure to explore, favoring confidently wrong answers. To address this, our core insight is that robust cognitive search requires a specific confidence trajectory pattern: such methods perform exploratory branching at the beginning, as manifested by low initial confidence, and converge to a high final confidence solution. To implement this insight, we introduce consilience, a novel selection framework that explicitly evaluates the temporal asymmetry of confidence in reasoning. We operationalize this via a combinatorial metric that actively penalizes high initial confidence while strictly demanding final certainty. Extensive experiments covering both graduate-level mathematics problems and free-form code generation demonstrate that consilience effectively outperforms existing baselines, validating our novel perspective on completion confidence.
Related papers
- Less Approximates More: Harmonizing Performance and Confidence Faithfulness via Hybrid Post-Training for High-Stakes Tasks [52.81286869496811]
Large language models are increasingly deployed in high-stakes tasks, where confident yet incorrect inferences may cause real-world harm.<n>We propose to jointly optimize unsupervised Reinforcement Learning from Internal Feedback with reasoning-trace-guided Reasoning Distillation.<n>We introduce HyTuning, a hybrid post-training framework that adaptively reweights RD and RLIF via a PRG-style metric.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-09T16:50:11Z) - Confidence Estimation for LLMs in Multi-turn Interactions [48.081802290688394]
This work presents the first systematic study of confidence estimation in multi-turn interactions.<n>We establish a formal evaluation framework grounded in two key desideratas: per-turn calibration and monotonicity of confidence.<n>Our work provides a foundational methodology for developing more reliable and trustworthy conversational agents.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-05T14:58:04Z) - Open-World Deepfake Attribution via Confidence-Aware Asymmetric Learning [78.92934995292113]
We propose a Confidence-Aware Asymmetric Learning (CAL) framework, which balances confidence across known and novel forgery types.<n>CAL consistently outperforms previous methods, achieving new state-of-the-art performance on both known and novel forgery attribution.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-14T12:31:28Z) - BrowseConf: Confidence-Guided Test-Time Scaling for Web Agents [58.05949210993854]
We investigate whether search agents have the ability to communicate their own confidence through verbalized confidence scores after long sequences of actions.<n>We propose Test-Time Scaling (TTS) methods that use confidence scores to determine answer quality, encourage the model to try again until reaching a satisfactory confidence level.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-27T15:58:51Z) - Can Confidence Estimates Decide When Chain-of-Thought Is Necessary for LLMs? [32.02698064940949]
Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting has emerged as a common technique for enhancing the reasoning abilities of large language models.<n>We present the first systematic study of training-free confidence estimation methods for CoT gating.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-23T21:33:28Z) - Mind the Generation Process: Fine-Grained Confidence Estimation During LLM Generation [63.49409574310576]
Large language models (LLMs) exhibit overconfidence, assigning high confidence scores to incorrect predictions.<n>We introduce FineCE, a novel confidence estimation method that delivers accurate, fine-grained confidence scores during text generation.<n>Our code and all baselines used in the paper are available on GitHub.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-08-16T13:29:35Z) - A Call to Reflect on Evaluation Practices for Failure Detection in Image
Classification [0.491574468325115]
We present a large-scale empirical study for the first time enabling benchmarking confidence scoring functions.
The revelation of a simple softmax response baseline as the overall best performing method underlines the drastic shortcomings of current evaluation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-11-28T12:25:27Z) - An evaluation of word-level confidence estimation for end-to-end
automatic speech recognition [70.61280174637913]
We investigate confidence estimation for end-to-end automatic speech recognition (ASR)
We provide an extensive benchmark of popular confidence methods on four well-known speech datasets.
Our results suggest a strong baseline can be obtained by scaling the logits by a learnt temperature.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-01-14T09:51:59Z)
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.