arXiv — cs.AI preprintsInternational16 October 2026
When Judges Agree and Are Wrong: Consistency-Accuracy Dissociation as a Blind Spot for Label-Free Evaluation
This is an official announcement record
Firsthand records what arXiv — cs.AI preprints announced and links to the original. The wording below is theirs, not ours.
arXiv:2610.21128v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Label-free evaluation methods, such as self-consistency filtering, majority-vote aggregation, and agreement-based reliability scoring, rely on an implicit assumption that consistency can serve as a proxy for correctness when ground-truth labels are unavailable or expensive to obtain. In this paper, we test this assumption directly. Using four financial QA datasets (multiple-choice and free-form), ten consistency dimensions, and two frontier model families, we measure the joint distribution of consistency and accuracy at the level of individual
Read the official announcement
Opens arxiv.org
More from arXiv — cs.AI preprints
- The World Won't Wait: Evaluating and Teaching Agents Under a Live Clock16 October 2026
- Evaluating Model Capabilities After Benchmark Saturation16 October 2026
- Value-Informed Schedule Trimming for Accelerated Sequential Monte Carlo Guidance in Discrete Diffusion16 October 2026
- AlphaDiana: A Measurement System for Agents in Verifiable Reasoning Tasks16 October 2026
- When Correctness Feedback Erases Evidence: Phase-Separated Completeness Auditing in Verus16 October 2026
This content is for informational purposes only and is not professional advice. Specifications, prices, plan tiers, and features change frequently and may differ from what is shown here; verify current details on the manufacturer's or company's official page before purchasing. Ratings are based on analysis of published documentation, not independent lab testing.