# Response drift across frontier large language models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.20454 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.20454/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 24 of its 48 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 14 May 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 24 of 24)

- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.11401/) (2020)
- [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)
- [On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.07258/) (2021)
- [Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08073/) (2022)
- [Switch Transformers: Scaling to Trillion Parameter Models with Simple and Efficient Sparsity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.03961/) (2021)
- [Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.15556/) (2022)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.03629/) (2022)
- [FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14251/) (2023)
- [Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.04132/) (2024)
- [Scaling Laws for Reward Model Overoptimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.10760/) (2022)
- [Humanity's Last Exam](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.14249/) (2025)
- [From Crowdsourced Data to High-Quality Benchmarks: Arena-Hard and BenchBuilder Pipeline](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11939/) (2024)
- [Towards Measuring the Representation of Subjective Global Opinions in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.16388/) (2023)
- [WildBench: Benchmarking LLMs with Challenging Tasks from Real Users in the Wild](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.04770/) (2024)
- [Goal Misgeneralization: Why Correct Specifications Aren't Enough For Correct Goals](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.01790/) (2022)
- [Do Language Models Know When They're Hallucinating References?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18248/) (2023)
- [What Large Language Models Know and What People Think They Know](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.13835/) (2024)
- [MMLU-CF: A Contamination-free Multi-task Language Understanding Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15194/) (2024)
- [Densing Law of LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.04315/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

All frontier large language models (LLMs) exhibit response drift -- producing outputs that deviate from expert-validated references -- yet the magnitude and structure of this drift remain uncharacterised by systematic human evaluation. Here we report a fully crossed evaluation in which 47 geographically diverse participants each assessed all 62 multidomain questions across ten frontier LLMs under blinded conditions, yielding 29,140 independent assessments. Every model drifts, but drift magnitude varies substantially: eight models converge on a statistically indistinguishable ceiling (78-81% deviation), while two achieve lower deviation (47-49%). Drift profiles differ across six domains and 62 questions, with pairwise correlations among ceiling models exceeding r = 0.85. Automated similarity metrics explain less than 2% of variance in human judgements. These findings reveal that response drift is universal across frontier LLMs, domain- and question-dependent in structure, and accessible only through human-centred evaluation.
