How Much Do You Trust A Dog? Quantifying Hint-Following in Reasoning Language Models
arXiv:2610.32055v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) often exhibit sycophancy, altering their answers to align with user suggestions even on objective factual and reasoning tasks. Yet the quantitative form of this influence--- and whether it is calibrated to source reliability--- remains poorly understood. In this work, we investigate this behavior through hint-induced answer shifts on MMLU questions, evaluating prompts of the form ``[Source] thinks the answer is (X)''. W
Read original source
Source record
Research analysis
Research claim
Paper identifier: 2610.32055. Source account: arXiv:2610.32055v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) often exhibit sycophancy, altering their answers to align with user suggestions even on objective factual and reasoning tasks. Yet the quantitative form of this influence--- and whether it is calibrated to source reliability--- remains poorly understood. In this work, we investigate this behavior through hint-induced answer shifts on MMLU questions, evaluating prompts of the form ``[Source] thinks the answer is (X)''. W
Evaluation record
Recent records to compare: “Show HN: Teach a speech model (en) a name by saying it once, on your Mac” (Show HN, Nov 5, 2026); “Human-like cross-language generalisation in deep neural speaker embeddings and its acoustic foundations” (arXiv, Nov 5, 2026). Shared themes are navigation hints; they have not been verified as the same need or independent corroboration.
What the result supports
Interpret results only for the reported model version, task, data and inference budget. Community votes, downloads or a benchmark position do not establish reliability in a different workflow.
Validity gaps
Check sample selection, baseline configuration, uncertainty, contamination risk, negative results and access to code or weights. No reproduction by WeWorkBuddy is recorded here.
Verification plan
Read the paper or model card and its evaluation appendix. Reproduce one bounded result against the stated baseline, then test a representative user task and record where the conclusion fails.