{"id":18328,"date":"2026-09-02T03:02:47","date_gmt":"2026-09-02T03:02:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/techtrendfeed.com\/?p=18328"},"modified":"2026-09-02T03:02:47","modified_gmt":"2026-09-02T03:02:47","slug":"llms-are-not-persistently-bayesian-quantifying-inside-inconsistencies-of-llms-probabilistic-beliefs","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/techtrendfeed.com\/?p=18328","title":{"rendered":"LLMs Are Not (Persistently) Bayesian: Quantifying Inside (In)consistencies of LLMs\u2019 Probabilistic Beliefs"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n<\/p>\n

\n

Trendy AI programs are being deployed in advanced domains corresponding to drugs, science, and regulation, the place there may be typically not a single appropriate reply given the noticed proof. Such programs should have the ability to characterize and replace unsure beliefs concerning the world as new proof arrives to make rational selections. We introduce the novel strategy of learning LLMs as data processing guidelines and make the most of the knowledge processing hole\u2014the deviation from Bayes updates\u2014to review the interior (in)consistencies of how LLMs replace their probabilistic beliefs from proof. Our in depth experiments consider a number of approaches by which LLMs can incorporate proof into their beliefs. A few of these approaches produce (almost) Bayesian updates, thus optimally processing proof; others use a discovered heuristic. Surprisingly, the non-Bayesian heuristic updates typically outperform actual Bayesian updates (optimum data processing) when it comes to downstream job efficiency\u2014indicating the LLMs\u2019 probabilistic fashions of the world are misspecified. Lastly, we present how our measure can present diagnostics to establish points with LLM-powered inferential programs.<\/p>\n