Request Correction
Use this form to request corrections to the paper metadata. Select the fields that need correction and provide the correct information.
Correction Guidelines
- Click the edit button next to a field to report a correction.
- Fill in the suggested correction value for each field you want to correct.
- Provide your name and email so we can contact you if needed.
Paper Information
A Binary Problem in Binary QA: Diverse LLMs or Diverse Question Interpretations? That Is the Ensembling Question
Paper Fields
Click the edit button next to a field to report a correction.
A Binary Problem in Binary QA: Diverse LLMs or Diverse Question Interpretations? That Is the Ensembling Question
Effectively leveraging diversity has been shown to improve performance for various machine learning models, including large language models (LLMs). However, determining the most effective way of using diversity remains a challenge. In this work, we compare two diversity approaches for answering binary questions using LLMs: model diversity, which relies on multiple models answering the same question, and question interpretation diversity, which relies on using the same model to answer the same question framed in different ways. For both cases, we apply majority voting as the ensemble consensus heuristic to determine the final answer. Our experiments on boolq, strategyqa, and pubmedqa show that question interpretation diversity consistently leads to better ensemble accuracy compared to model diversity. Furthermore, our analysis of GPT and LLaMa shows that model diversity typically produces results between the best and the worst ensemble members without clear improvement.
Authors
Expand an author to correct their information. Use the remove button to request author removal, or add a new author.
PDF Attachment
You may attach a PDF as a corrected version of the paper. Max file size: 10MB. Only PDF files are accepted.
Your Information
Author Declaration *
Select at least one field to correct using the edit buttons above.