Predicting the Performance of Black-box Language Models with Follow-up Queries
Dylan Sam, Marc Finzi, Zico Kolter
Abstract
Reliably predicting the behavior of language models -- such as whether their outputs are correct or have been adversarially manipulated -- is a fundamentally challenging task. This is often made even more difficult as frontier language models are offered only through closed-source APIs, providing only black-box access. In this paper, we predict the behavior of black-box language models by asking follow-up questions and taking the probabilities of responses as representations to train reliable predictors. We first demonstrate that training a linear model on these responses reliably and accurately predicts model correctness on question-answering and reasoning benchmarks. Surprisingly, this can even outperform white-box linear predictors that operate over model internals or activations. Furthermore, we demonstrate that these follow-up question responses can reliably distinguish between a clean version of an LLM and one that has been adversarially influenced via a system prompt to answer questions incorrectly or to introduce bugs into generated code. Finally, we show that they can also be used to differentiate between black-box LLMs, enabling the detection of misrepresented models provided through an API. Overall, our work shows promise in monitoring black-box language model behavior, supporting their deployment in larger, autonomous systems.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 62f29a1b-96cf-4729-95fc-fd4b8686a0e0Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on23
- Measuring Massive Multitask Language UnderstandingDan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou et al.ICLR 2021 · 7,905 citations
- WinoGrande: An Adversarial Winograd Schema Challenge at ScaleKeisuke Sakaguchi, Ronan Le Bras, Chandra Bhagavatula, Yejin ChoiAAAI 2020 · 3,037 citations
- Concept Bottleneck ModelsPang Wei Koh, Thao Nguyen, Yew Siang Tang, Stephen Mussmann et al.ICML 2020 · 1,233 citations
- Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMsMiao Xiong, Zhiyuan Hu, Xinyang Lu, Yifei Li et al.ICLR 2024 · 867 citations
- Fantastic Generalization Measures and Where to Find ThemYiding Jiang, Behnam Neyshabur, Hossein Mobahi, Dilip Krishnan et al.ICLR 2020 · 705 citations
Related papers
- How to Catch an AI Liar: Lie Detection in Black-Box LLMs by Asking Unrelated QuestionsLorenzo Pacchiardi, Alex James Chan, Sören Mindermann, Ilan Moscovitz et al.ICLR 2024 · 88 citations
- Calibrating Large Language Models Using Their Generations OnlyDennis Ulmer, Martin Gubri, Hwaran Lee, Sangdoo Yun et al.ACL 2024
- Auditing Black-Box LLM APIs with a Rank-Based Uniformity TestXiaoyuan Zhu, Yaowen Ye, Tianyi Qiu, Hanlin Zhu et al.ICLR 2026 · 22 citations
- Confidence Elicitation: A New Attack Vector for Large Language ModelsBrian Formento, Chuan-Sheng Foo, See-Kiong NgICLR 2025
- Model Provenance Testing for Large Language ModelsIvica Nikolic, Teodora Baluta, Prateek SaxenaNeurIPS 2025 · 20 citations
