Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Compared to What? Baselines and Metrics for Counterfactual Prompting

Counterfactual prompting (i.e., perturbing a single factor and measuring output change) is widely used to evaluate things like LLM bias and CoT faithfulness. But in this work we argue that observed effects cannot be attributed to the targeted factor without accounting for baseline "meaning-preserving" modifications to text that establish general model sensitivity. This is because every counterfactual edit is a compound treatment that bundles the variable of interest with incidental surface-form variation; this violates treatment variation irrelevance. We observe prediction flip rates on MedQA of 14.9% when we surgically change patient gender. However, this is statistically indistinguishab...

AuthorsZihao Yang, Mosh Levy, Yoav Goldberg et al.
Primary categorycs.CL
Published1 May 2026
Last updated at source20 August 2026
cs.CLcs.LG
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/f12093e6-1b98-458a-8e4e-3ece7abafde5" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.