Estimating the Self-Consistency of LLMs
On the map: LLM reasoning → Test-time compute and efficient thinking
Abstract (arXiv)
Systems often repeat the same prompt to large language models (LLMs) and aggregate responses to improve reliability. This short note analyzes an estimator of the self-consistency of LLMs and the tradeoffs it induces under a fixed compute budget B=mn, where m is the number of prompts sampled from the task distribution and n is the number of repeated LLM calls per prompt; the resulting analysis favors a rough split m,npropto√B.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Test-time compute and efficient thinking, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 3 of its 4 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Sep 2025.
Builds on
3 of 4 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Self-Consistency Is Losing Its Edge: Diminishing Returns and Rising Costs in Modern LLMs
- 2023Self-Consistency of Large Language Models under Ambiguity
- 2026Position: It's Time to Optimize LLMs for Self-Consistency
- 2025Existing LLMs Are Not Self-Consistent For Simple Tasks
- 2026When Is Enough Enough in Self-Evolving LLM Systems?
- 2024Internal Consistency and Self-Feedback in Large Language Models: A Survey
- 2024Evaluating the Consistency of LLM Evaluators
- 2023Let's Sample Step by Step: Adaptive-Consistency for Efficient Reasoning and Coding with LLMs