Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Faithfulness Metrics Don't Measure Faithfulness: A Meta-Evaluation with Ground Truth

Chains of thought (CoTs) have become central in interpreting and auditing behaviors of large language models. Yet growing evidence suggests that these traces often fail to faithfully represent the computations behind a model's predictions. Several faithfulness metrics have been proposed, but whether they indeed measure faithfulness remains unknown. Answering this requires ground-truth labels, which are hard to obtain since internal computations are not directly observable. Consequently, most works proposing metrics report only absolute scores or comparisons to prior metrics, and the few existing benchmarks rely on proxies like plausibility or importance, properties orthogonal to faithfuln...

AuthorsYoav Gur-Arieh, Ana Marasović, Mor Geva
Primary categorycs.CL
Published24 May 2026
Last updated at source24 May 2026
cs.CL
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/b7b9c905-2553-4400-acdb-ea7b11a3fb76" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Models and datasets referencing this paper

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 Information may be incomplete or out of date.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.