arXiv:2606.06941v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) now solve a wide range of expert-level exams at or above human level, yet remain brittle on specialised, evidence-intensive domains such as law. On these tasks, errors arise not only from gaps in world knowledge but also from subtle distinctions between pieces of evidence and inconsistent use of supporting evidence. The most common aggregator over sampled chain-of-thought (CoT) traces, majority vote, returns the most popular answer regardless of whether its evidence is actually strongest. We propose to treat the selec

Source: arXiv cs.AI — read the full report at the original publisher.

This is a curated wire item. The Continuum Brief does not republish full third-party articles; this entry links to the original source.