Log Probability Tracking of LLM APIs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
When using an LLM through an API provider, users expect the served model to remain consistent over time, a property crucial for the reliability of downstream applications and the reproducibility of research. Existing audit methods are too costly to apply at regular time intervals to the wide range of available LLM APIs. This means that model updates are left largely unmonitored in practice. In this work, we show that while LLM log probabilities (logprobs) are usually non-deterministic, they can still be used as the basis for cost-effective continuous monitoring of LLM APIs. We apply a simple statistical test based on the average value of each token logprob, requesting only a single token of output. This is enough to detect changes as small as one step of fine-tuning, making this approach more sensitive than existing methods while being 1,000x cheaper. We introduce the TinyChange benchmark as a way to measure the sensitivity of audit methods in the context of small, realistic model changes.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 20 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Dec 2025.
Builds on
11 of 20 references.
References · 11
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,944
- 2023Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!cited by 1,154
- 2023LMSYS-Chat-1M: A Large-Scale Real-World LLM Conversation Datasetcited by 461
- 2023How is ChatGPT's behavior changing over time?cited by 270
- 2024Stealing Part of a Production Language Modelcited by 159
- 2024zkLLM: Zero Knowledge Proofs for Large Language Modelscited by 51
- 2025Are You Getting What You Pay For? Auditing Model Substitution in LLM APIscited by 38
- 2022Active Fairness Auditingcited by 27
- 2025TOPLOC: A Locality Sensitive Hashing Scheme for Trustless Verifiable Inferencecited by 17
- 2021Did the Model Change? Efficiently Assessing Machine Learning API Shiftscited by 13
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 10.
10 papers.
- 2026Token-Efficient Change Detection in LLM APIscited by 5
- 2026KBF: Knowledge Boundary as Fingerprint for Language Model and Black-Box API Auditingcited by 3
- 2026Fingerprinting Inference Systems of Large Language Modelscited by 1
- 2026VERDI: Single-Call Confidence Estimation for Verification-Based LLM Judges via Decomposed Inferencecited by 0
- 2026Black-Box Inference of LLM Architectural Properties with Restrictive API Accesscited by 0
- 2026Runtime Uncertainty Monitoring for LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems Using Bayesian Networkscited by 0
- 2026Ventor-QTest: Threat-Model-Driven Verification of Vendor-Hosted LLM APIscited by 0
- 2026SafeLLM4SE: Statistical Evaluation and Reporting for LLM-based Software Engineering Systemscited by 0
- 2026Measuring and Reducing Cross-Vendor Mismatch in Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026Learning to Detect Shifts in Unstructured Data Streams via Monitoring-by-Bettingcited by 0
- 2026Learning to Detect Shifts in Unstructured Data Streams via Monitoring-by-Betting12 Oct 2026
- 2026Measuring and Reducing Cross-Vendor Mismatch in Language Models4 Oct 2026
- 2026SafeLLM4SE: Statistical Evaluation and Reporting for LLM-based Software Engineering Systems29 Sep 2026
- 2026Ventor-QTest: Threat-Model-Driven Verification of Vendor-Hosted LLM APIs17 Aug 2026
- 2026Runtime Uncertainty Monitoring for LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems Using Bayesian Networks28 Jul 2026
- 2026Black-Box Inference of LLM Architectural Properties with Restrictive API Access1 Jul 2026
- 2026Fingerprinting Inference Systems of Large Language Models28 May 2026
- 2026KBF: Knowledge Boundary as Fingerprint for Language Model and Black-Box API Auditing28 May 2026
- 2026VERDI: Single-Call Confidence Estimation for Verification-Based LLM Judges via Decomposed Inference11 May 2026
- 2026Token-Efficient Change Detection in LLM APIs11 Feb 2026