mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

From Drift to Coherence: Stabilizing Beliefs in LLMs

arXiv 2606.17832 ↗First posted 16 Jun 2026cs.LGcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are often hypothesized to perform implicit Bayesian inference, yet a key coherence condition, the martingale property of predictive beliefs, has been shown to fail in controlled synthetic in-context learning settings. We revisit this question in a more typical usage regime: generic multiple-choice question answering. Exploiting the discrete answer space, we compute exact predictive distributions and study belief dynamics induced by autoregressive answer resampling. We introduce prompted predictive resampling (PPR), where an LLM generates a sequence of answers to the same question. Empirically, PPR reveals early-stage belief drift, indicating martingale violations. However, after sufficient resampling steps, the belief process self-stabilizes and converges to a coherent predictive distribution. Based on this observation, we further propose (i) a seed-answer prompting strategy to accelerate stabilization, and (ii) a self-consistency loss that amortizes early-stage drift into the model via fine-tuning. Experiments on multiple-choice QA benchmarks show that our methods substantially reduce belief drift and improve predictive coherence without sacrificing accuracy.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Jun 2026.

Builds on

19 of 36 references.

References · 19

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  2. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  3. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,380
  4. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
  5. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
  6. 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,708
  7. 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,886
  8. 2025Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilitiescited by 3,796
  9. 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,879
  10. 2018CommonsenseQA: A Question Answering Challenge Targeting Commonsense Knowledgecited by 1,822
  11. 2025OpenAI GPT-5 System Cardcited by 989
  12. 2021An Explanation of In-context Learning as Implicit Bayesian Inferencecited by 938
7 more
  1. 2023Large Language Models Are Latent Variable Models: Explaining and Finding Good Demonstrations for In-Context Learningcited by 149
  2. 2023What and How does In-Context Learning Learn? Bayesian Model Averaging, Parameterization, and Generalizationcited by 118
  3. 2023In-Context Learning through the Bayesian Prismcited by 83
  4. 2024Is In-Context Learning in Large Language Models Bayesian? A Martingale Perspectivecited by 57
  5. 2021Martingale posterior distributionscited by 45
  6. 2023A Latent Space Theory for Emergent Abilities in Large Language Modelscited by 43
  7. 2025Bayesian Predictive Inference Beyond Martingalescited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Martingale Score: An Unsupervised Metric for Bayesian Rationality in LLM Reasoning
  2. 2025CGES: Confidence-Guided Early Stopping for Efficient and Accurate Self-Consistency
  3. 2024Refining Answer Distributions for Improved Large Language Model Reasoning
  4. 2026Mitigating LLM sycophancy with RL-based fine-tuning: Bayesian Truth Serum approach
  5. 2026When Does a Language Model Commit? A Finite-Answer Theory of Pre-Verbalization Commitment
  6. 2026Inference Time Optimization with Confidence Dynamics
  7. 2026The Stepwise Informativeness Assumption: Why are Entropy Dynamics and Reasoning Correlated in LLMs?
  8. 2025No Answer Needed: Predicting LLM Answer Accuracy from Question-Only Linear Probes