arXiv (All)
open access
Filtered Reasoning Score: Evaluating Reasoning Quality on a Model's Most-Confident Traces
Should we trust Large Language Models (LLMs) with high accuracy? LLMs achieve high accuracy on reasoning benchmarks, but correctness alone does not reveal the quality of the reasoning used to produce it. This highlights a fundamental limitation of outcome-based evaluation: models may arrive at corre
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- WordPolo: Evaluating Language Models Through Iterative Semantic Feedback#1013219
- ReasoningFlow: Discourse Structures for Understanding LLM Reasoning Traces#999804
- Reasoning-Trace Collapse: Evaluating the Loss of Explicit Reasoning During Fine-Tuning#1129269
- When Does Reasoning Help in Machine Translation? A Hierarchical Analysis of LRM Reasoning Traces#1035213
- Reasoning Shift: How Context Silently Shortens LLM Reasoning#1141509
Record · ID 1234769
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive