Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Likelihood Ranking doesn't Scale Like Prompting in LLMs

LLM evaluation is commonly performed either by prompting models to produce answers or by scoring candidate outputs with likelihood-based metrics. In multiple-choice QA, however, standard likelihood-based scoring is still conditioned on the question and answer set, and can therefore leverage the same task-conditioned answer-selection interface used in prompting. We study a complementary protocol based on likelihood ranking of declarative statements constructed from the same question--answer pairs. Across 95 decoder-only models, ranging from 0.1B to 104B parameters, and 10 MCQA datasets, we find a systematic divergence between declarative-statement likelihood ranking and prompted answering....

AuthorsAlessandro Bondielli, Lucia Passaro, Davide Bacciu et al.
Primary categorycs.CL
Published24 September 2026
Last updated at source25 September 2026
cs.CL
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/f4888cbe-7005-4d81-a034-fc1b582ab5ec" 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 Information may be incomplete or out of date.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.