aiqbench analysis
This research investigates how instruction tuning alters the relationship between model confidence and rationale diversity, revealing that tuning increases overconfidence even when predictive accuracy remains stable. The study finds that while cross-rationale diversity consistently drops, surface-level lexical variation fluctuates unpredictably across different benchmarks and models. These findings highlight a critical calibration issue where instruction-tuned models become more assertive without necessarily improving the consistency or quality of their supporting arguments.
Are You Sure You're Sure? On the Impact of Instruction Tuning on Confidence and Lexical Diversity
arXiv:2608.13430v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Instruction-tuned language models achieve strong performance across a range of generation tasks but have recently been shown to exhibit verbalized overconfidence, which may manifest in less diverse supporting rationales for incorrect answers. However, whether such overconfidence is associated with rationale consistency remains an open question. In this paper, we study whether changes in the lexical diversity of generated answer rationales accompany changes in model confidence induced by instruction tuning. We evaluate three matched base and instruction-tuned models across question-answering benchmarks and find that instruction tuning consistently increases answer confidence, despite limited changes in predictive accuracy, while degrading likelihood-based calibration. Secondly, we observe a non-uniform effect of instruction tuning on rationale diversity: cross-rationale diversity consistently decreases, whereas surface-level lexical diversity varies in both direction and magnitude across models and benchmarks. Finally, we find that these differences persist after controlling for answer selection and rationale length, confirming that confidence and rationale diversity capture distinct effects of instruction tuning.
Title:Are You Sure You're Sure? On the Impact of Instruction Tuning on Confidence and Lexical Diversity
Abstract:Instruction-tuned language models achieve strong performance across a range of generation tasks but have recently been shown to exhibit verbalized overconfidence, which may manifest in less diverse supporting rationales for incorrect answers. However, whether such overconfidence is associated with rationale consistency remains an open question. In this paper, we study whether changes in the lexical diversity of generated answer rationales accompany changes in model confidence induced by instruction tuning. We evaluate three matched base and instruction-tuned models across question-answering benchmarks and find that instruction tuning consistently increases answer confidence, despite limited changes in predictive accuracy, while degrading likelihood-based calibration. Secondly, we observe a non-uniform effect of instruction tuning on rationale diversity: cross-rationale diversity consistently decreases, whereas surface-level lexical diversity varies in both direction and magnitude across models and benchmarks. Finally, we find that these differences persist after controlling for answer selection and rationale length, confirming that confidence and rationale diversity capture distinct effects of instruction tuning.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2608.13430 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2608.13430v2 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.13430 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 268 words
Related coverage

Concrete Evaluations to Investigate the OpenAI Model That Hacked Hugging Face
AI Alignment Forum · Aug 3, 2026
Untrusted advice for AI control: Short, strong advice significantly uplifts weak LLMs
LessWrong · Jul 27, 2026

Research Note: Filtering Subversion-Relevant Information From Pretraining Data Is Feasible
LessWrong · Oct 5, 2026
Links #3: 2026/06 Part 1
LessWrong · Jun 15, 2026