arXiv:2604.23398cs.AI2026-04中稿 · icaide 2026被引 2

修复大模型对逻辑否定的过度保守时,提示设计不当反而降低准确率。

When Corrective Hints Hurt: Prompt Design in Reasoner-Guided Repair of LLM Overcaution on Entailed Negations under OWL~2~DL

论文配图:When Corrective Hints Hurt: Prompt Design in Reasoner-Guided Repair of LLM Overcaution on Entailed Negations under OWL~2~DL
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 用推理器校验答案并修正错误,但提示中加入开放世界假设提示会适得其反。
  • 不带提示的修复模式准确率达97.8%,显著优于带提示的版本(67.2%)。
  • 研究揭示提示框架比纠错内容更关键,适合评估大模型推理可靠性的人参考。

我们在GPT-5上发现一个可复现的错误模式:在OWL~2~DL合规查询中,当推理器结论为"no"时,模型常回答"unknown",尤其在功能性属性闭包或类不交性条件下。基于180个经推理器审计的查询及2个独立领域(保险与临床)中18个手工编写的保留测试集,我们对比四种交互模式(单次、三次通用纠错重试、三次含开放世界假设提示的推理结果修复、同修复但无提示),在相同查询预算下进行评估。直接忠实度为43.9%(95%置信区间[36.8,51.2]);通用重试达81.7%([75.4,86.6]);含提示修复为67.2%([60.1,73.7]);仅修复无提示达97.8%([94.4,99.1])。所有成对比较均在麦纳马拉精确检验与波弗罗尼校正下显著(α=0.01;所有p<10⁻⁵)。该错误模式在保留测试集中同样导致4/4错误。结论表明:提示框架的影响可能超过纠正内容本身,推理引导封装应明确消融分析。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

We report a reproducible error pattern in GPT-5.4 on OWL~2~DL compliance queries: the model frequently answers ``unknown'' when the reasoner-entailed answer is ``no'' under \emph{FunctionalProperty} closure or class \emph{disjointness}. Using 180 reasoner-audited queries from a procedural expansion of the observed pattern plus 18 hand-authored held-out queries in two unrelated domains (insurance and clinical), we compare four interaction modes under matched query budget: single-shot, three rounds of generic ``you-are-wrong'' retry, three rounds of reasoner-verdict repair with an open-world-assumption (OWA) hint, and the same repair without the hint. Direct faithfulness is 43.9\,\% (Wilson 95\,\% CI $[36.8,51.2]$); generic retry reaches 81.7\,\% ($[75.4,86.6]$); the verdict-with-hint variant is \emph{worse} at 67.2\,\% ($[60.1,73.7]$); the verdict-only variant reaches 97.8\,\% ($[94.4,99.1]$). All pairwise comparisons remain significant under McNemar's exact test with Bonferroni correction ($α= 0.01$; all $p < 10^{-5}$). The same fingerprint accounts for 4/4 errors on the held-out queries. Our interpretation is bounded: prompt framing can matter more than corrective content, and reasoner-guided wrappers should be ablated explicitly.

大模型推理逻辑验证提示工程

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。