# RCScore: Quantifying Response Consistency in Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.26193 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.26193/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 29 of its 44 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 30 Oct 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 29 of 29)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.11692/) (2019)
- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03874/) (2021)
- [HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.07830/) (2019)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.04615/) (2022)
- [Gemma 3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.19786/) (2025)
- [FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14251/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17926/) (2023)
- [DROP: A Reading Comprehension Benchmark Requiring Discrete Reasoning Over Paragraphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1903.00161/) (2019)
- [State of What Art? A Call for Multi-Prompt LLM Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.00595/) (2023)
- [ARES: An Automated Evaluation Framework for Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.09476/) (2023)
- [ROSCOE: A Suite of Metrics for Scoring Step-by-Step Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.07919/) (2022)
- [Does Prompt Formatting Have Any Impact on LLM Performance?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.10541/) (2024)
- [What Did I Do Wrong? Quantifying LLMs' Sensitivity and Consistency to Prompt Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12334/) (2024)
- [Can LLMs Replace Human Evaluators? An Empirical Study of LLM-as-a-Judge in Software Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.06193/) (2025)
- [The language of prompting: What linguistic properties make a prompt successful?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.01967/) (2023)
- [How are Prompts Different in Terms of Sensitivity?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.07230/) (2023)
- [Direct Evaluation of Chain-of-Thought in Multi-hop Reasoning with Knowledge Graphs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.11199/) (2024)
- [Brains vs. Bytes: Evaluating LLM Proficiency in Olympiad Mathematics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.01995/) (2025)
- [Paraphrase Types Elicit Prompt Engineering Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.19898/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Ensembling LLM-Induced Decision Trees for Explainable and Robust Error Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.07246/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Current LLM evaluations often rely on a single instruction template, overlooking models' sensitivity to instruction style-a critical aspect for real-world deployments. We present RCScore, a multi-dimensional framework quantifying how instruction formulation affects model responses. By systematically transforming benchmark problems into multiple instruction styles, RCScore reveals performance variations undetected by conventional metrics. Our experiments across ten LLMs on four reasoning benchmarks demonstrate that instruction style can shift accuracy by up to 16.7% points. We introduce Cross-Response Similarity (CRS), a method applying RCScore metrics to measure stylistic self-consistency, and establish its strong correlation with task accuracy, suggesting consistency as a valuable proxy for model reliability. Additional findings show that deterministic decoding produces more stylistically stable outputs, and model scale correlates positively with cross-style consistency. RCScore offers a principled approach to assess instruction robustness.