Auditing MCQA Benchmarks through Probability Landscapes
2026-08-31 • Computation and Language
Computation and Language
AI summaryⓘ
The authors noticed that big language models are getting very good at multiple-choice questions, making it hard to tell which test questions are truly challenging or flawed. They created a simple two-step method that uses the model’s answer probabilities to analyze whole tests and individual questions. By adding some noise, their method helps find problematic questions that might need human checking. Testing this on several benchmarks showed their approach matches expert assessments and can help spot issues efficiently.
Large Language ModelsMultiple-Choice Question Answering (MCQA)BenchmarkingProbability DistributionEntropyNoise InjectionModel ConfidenceError AnalysisDataset ValidationHuman Review
Authors
Minsoo Song, Chanjun Park
Abstract
As Large Language Models rapidly advance, performance on standard multiple-choice question answering (MCQA) benchmarks is reaching saturation. While the community has responded by developing increasingly difficult datasets, validating question quality and filtering flawed items remains a labor-intensive process. To provide a scalable diagnostic approach, we propose a two-component probabilistic framework for auditing MCQA benchmarks using model output distributions. First, for benchmark-level analysis, we characterize the probability landscape using the top prediction probability ($P_{top1}$) and normalized residual entropy ($H_{norm}$), summarized globally by Mean Pairwise Distance (MPD). Second, for item-level diagnostics, we introduce noise injection to reduce meaningful distractor competition, enabling us to flag candidate items for targeted human review and categorize residual failure patterns. Across four MCQA benchmarks, our landscape analysis reveals benchmark-level differences in model confidence and residual option competition. Concurrently, our noise-injection method flags potentially actionable item-level issues, showing alignment with expert error annotations from MMLU-Redux. These results suggest that our probability-based framework provides a lightweight audit lens for comparing macro-level benchmark structure and prioritizing individual items for targeted human review.