Choices Speak Louder than Questions
Gyeongje Cho, Yeonkyoung So, Jaejin Lee
Abstract
Recent findings raise concerns about whether the evaluation of Multiple-Choice Question Answering (MCQA) accurately reflects the comprehension abilities of large language models. This paper explores the concept of choice sensitivity, which refers to the tendency for model decisions to be more influenced by the answer options than by a genuine understanding of the question. We introduce a new scoring method called Normalized Probability Shift by the Question (NPSQ), designed to isolate the impact of the question itself and provide a more reliable assessment of comprehension. Through experiments involving various input formats, including cloze, symbols, and hybrid formats, we find that traditional scoring methods — such as those based on log-likelihood or its length-normalized variant — are vulnerable to superficial characteristics of the answer choices. In contrast, NPSQ remains stable even when modifications are made to the answer options.
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 d4c7931d-df3f-407a-858a-1493cba8bcf4Builds on16
- Language Models are Few-Shot LearnersTom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 64,255 citations
- Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language ModelsJason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22,562 citations
- 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
- Calibrate Before Use: Improving Few-shot Performance of Language ModelsZihao Zhao, Eric Wallace, Shi Feng, Dan Klein et al.ICML 2021 · 1,843 citations
Related papers
- When Benchmarks are Targets: Revealing the Sensitivity of Large Language Model LeaderboardsNorah A. Alzahrani, Hisham Abdullah Alyahya, Yazeed Alnumay, Sultan Alrashed et al.ACL 2024 · 13 citations
- Leveraging Large Language Models for Multiple Choice Question AnsweringJoshua Robinson, David WingateICLR 2023 · 40 citations
- Which of These Best Describes Multiple Choice Evaluation with LLMs? A) Forced B) Flawed C) Fixable D) All of the AboveNishant Balepur, Rachel Rudinger, Jordan Lee Boyd-GraberACL 2025
- Does Question Really Matter? The Attribution of Answer Bias in LLM EvaluationBoxi Cao, Ruotong Pan, Hongyu Lin, Xianpei Han et al.AAAI 2026
- Large Language Models Are Not Robust Multiple Choice SelectorsChujie Zheng, Hao Zhou, Fandong Meng, Jie Zhou et al.ICLR 2024 · 424 citations
