跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.10325 · v1

Update Slope Is Bounded by Prior Calibration: A Structural Bound and Its Contingent Empirical Signature

首次提交 2026-11-07 07:51
版本更新 2026-11-07 07:51
雷达观测 2026-11-10 10:11
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Evaluations of LLM forecasters increasingly measure how forecasts improve as richer evidence is supplied. We identify two confounds in this update-slope metric. First, outcome-aware evidence construction substantially inflates measured responsiveness: on the same models and questions, slopes are roughly four times larger than with resolution-blinded evidence ladders. Second, update slope is a change score with a prior-dependent structural ceiling, so raw comparisons can reflect differences in starting calibration rather than updating behavior. The ceiling defines only a feasible region; whether slope and prior calibration are empirically coupled depends on headroom utilization and varies across our Manifold, ForecastBench, and ACLED pools. Despite this variability, conditioning on prior calibration roughly triples the association between intermediate updating and final Brier score under both blinded and outcome-aware construction. Question identity also explains substantially more variance than model identity across the evaluated pools. We recommend building evidence ladders blind to outcomes, conditioning on prior calibration, and reporting headroom-normalized measures alongside raw slopes.

作者备注:Accepted at the 2026 IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI 2026). 5 pages

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-07 07:51 · 最新观测版本

Update Slope Is Bounded by Prior Calibration: A Structural Bound and Its Contingent Empirical Signature

Evaluations of LLM forecasters increasingly measure how forecasts improve as richer evidence is supplied. We identify two confounds in this update-slope metric. First, outcome-aware evidence construction substantially inflates measured responsiveness: on the same models and questions, slopes are roughly four times larger than with resolution-blinded evidence ladders. Second, update slope is a change score with a prior-dependent structural ceiling, so raw comparisons can reflect differences in starting calibration rather than updating behavior. The ceiling defines only a feasible region; whether slope and prior calibration are empirically coupled depends on headroom utilization and varies across our Manifold, ForecastBench, and ACLED pools. Despite this variability, conditioning on prior calibration roughly triples the association between intermediate updating and final Brier score under both blinded and outcome-aware construction. Question identity also explains substantially more variance than model identity across the evaluated pools. We recommend building evidence ladders blind to outcomes, conditioning on prior calibration, and reporting headroom-normalized measures alongside raw slopes.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗