If Probable, Then Acceptable? Understanding Conditional Acceptability Judgments in Large Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Conditional acceptability refers to how plausible a conditional statement is perceived to be. It plays an important role in communication and reasoning, as it influences how individuals interpret implications, assess arguments, and make decisions based on hypothetical scenarios. When humans evaluate how acceptable a conditional "If A, then B" is, their judgments are influenced by two main factors: the textitconditional probability of B given A, and the textitsemantic relevance of the antecedent A given the consequent B (i.e., whether A meaningfully supports B). While prior work has examined how large language models (LLMs) draw inferences about conditional statements, it remains unclear how these models judge the textitacceptability of such statements. To address this gap, we present a comprehensive study of LLMs' conditional acceptability judgments across different model families, sizes, and prompting strategies. Using linear mixed-effects models and ANOVA tests, we find that models are sensitive to both conditional probability and semantic relevanceunicodex2014though to varying degrees depending on architecture and prompting style. A comparison with human data reveals that while LLMs incorporate probabilistic and semantic cues, they do so less consistently than humans. Notably, larger models do not necessarily align more closely with human judgments.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Oct 2025.
Builds on
10 of 31 references.
References · 10
- 2023Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedbackcited by 788
- 2023Quantifying Language Models' Sensitivity to Spurious Features in Prompt Design or: How I learned to start worrying about prompt formattingcited by 778
- 2023Large Language Models Are Not Robust Multiple Choice Selectorscited by 454
- 2020Transformers as Soft Reasoners over Languagecited by 265
- 2024Large Language Models are Inconsistent and Biased Evaluatorscited by 146
- 2024What Did I Do Wrong? Quantifying LLMs' Sensitivity and Consistency to Prompt Engineeringcited by 88
- 2024On Verbalized Confidence Scores for LLMscited by 83
- 2023The Magic of IF: Investigating Causal Reasoning Abilities in Large Language Models of Codecited by 21
- 2024Comparing Inferential Strategies of Humans and Large Language Models in Deductive Reasoningcited by 13
- 2025Do Large Language Models Reason Causally Like Us? Even Better?cited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.