AI Debate Aids Assessment of Controversial Claims

Salman Rahman; Sheriff Issaka; Ashima Suvarna; Genglin Liu; James Shiffer; Jaeyoung Lee; Md Rizwan Parvez; Hamid Palangi; Shi Feng; Nanyun Peng; Yejin Choi; Julian Michael; Liwei Jiang; Saadia Gabriel

arXiv · 2506.02175

AI Debate Aids Assessment of Controversial Claims

Salman Rahman·Sheriff Issaka·Ashima Suvarna·Genglin Liu·James Shiffer·Jaeyoung Lee·Md Rizwan Parvez·Hamid Palangi·Shi Feng·Nanyun Peng·Yejin Choi·Julian Michael·Liwei Jiang·Saadia Gabriel

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

As AI grows more powerful, it will increasingly shape how we understand the world. But with this influence comes the risk of amplifying misinformation and deepening social divides-especially on consequential topics where factual accuracy directly impacts well-being. Scalable Oversight aims to ensure AI systems remain truthful even when their capabilities exceed those of their evaluators. Yet when humans serve as evaluators, their own beliefs and biases can impair judgment. We study whether AI debate can guide biased judges toward the truth by having two AI systems debate opposing sides of controversial factuality claims on COVID-19 and climate change where people hold strong prior beliefs. We conduct two studies. Study I recruits human judges with either mainstream or skeptical beliefs who evaluate claims through two protocols: debate (interaction with two AI advisors arguing opposing sides) or consultancy (interaction with a single AI advisor). Study II uses AI judges with and without human-like personas to evaluate the same protocols. In Study I, debate consistently improves human judgment accuracy and confidence calibration, outperforming consultancy by 4-10% across COVID-19 and climate change claims. The improvement is most significant for judges with mainstream beliefs (up to +15.2% accuracy on COVID-19 claims), though debate also helps skeptical judges who initially misjudge claims move toward accurate views (+4.7% accuracy). In Study II, AI judges with human-like personas achieve even higher accuracy (78.5%) than human judges (70.1%) and default AI judges without personas (69.8%), suggesting their potential for supervising frontier AI models. These findings highlight AI debate as a promising path toward scalable, bias-resilient oversight in contested domains.

Explore related subjects

cs.CL

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Salman Rahman, Sheriff Issaka, Ashima Suvarna, Genglin Liu, James Shiffer, Jaeyoung Lee, Md Rizwan Parvez, Hamid Palangi, Shi Feng, Nanyun Peng, Yejin Choi, Julian Michael, Liwei Jiang, Saadia Gabriel. 2025-10-29. AI Debate Aids Assessment of Controversial Claims. https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.02175

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Hierarchical attention interpretation: an interpretable speech-level transformer for bi-modal depression detection

Depression is a common mental disorder. Automatic depression detection tools using speech, enabled by machine learning, help early screening of depression. This paper addresses two limitations that may hinder the clinical implementations of such tools: noise resulting from segment-level labelling and a lack of model interpretability. We propose a bi-modal speech-level transformer to avoid segment-level labelling and introduce a hierarchical interpretation approach to provide both speech-level and sentence-level interpretations, based on gradient-weighted attention maps derived from all attention layers to track interactions between input features. We show that the proposed model outperforms a model that learns at a segment level ($p$=0.854, $r$=0.947, $F1$=0.897 compared to $p$=0.732, $r$=0.808, $F1$=0.768). For model interpretation, using one true positive sample, we show which sentences within a given speech are most relevant to depression detection; and which text tokens and Mel-spectrogram regions within these sentences are most relevant to depression detection. These interpretations allow clinicians to verify the validity of predictions made by depression detection tools, promoting their clinical implementations.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Cultural Alignment in Large Language Models Using Soft Prompt Tuning

Large Language Model (LLM) alignment is commonly achieved through supervised fine-tuning or reinforcement learning, both of which require labeled or preference data and update model weights. Without targeted cultural adaptation, however, deployed LLMs often exhibit culturally homogeneous behavior that fails to reflect diverse local values. Aligning models to cultural value frameworks such as Hofstede's Value Survey Module (VSM13) presents a distinct challenge: alignment signals are available only as aggregated survey-level scores computed after generating responses to an entire survey, providing no per-token gradient and requiring no preference data by construction. This makes standard gradient-based alignment methods ill-suited to the task. We propose a deployment-friendly approach that encodes cultural behavior in short, tunable soft prompts optimized with Differential Evolution (DE), while keeping model weights frozen and requiring no preference data. At inference, the system inserts the appropriate cultural-specific prompt to adapt model responses for different cultures. Experiments across four countries and four instruction-tuned models show that DE-optimized prompts generally reduce discrepancy with VSM13 reference profiles, improve rank agreement with the World Values Survey (WVS), an independent framework not seen during optimization, and are preferred in blinded pairwise evaluations using majority voting across three LLM judges.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

VQ-Logits: Compressing the Output Bottleneck of Large Language Models via Vector Quantized Logits

Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success but face significant computational and memory challenges, particularly due to their extensive output vocabularies. The final linear projection layer, mapping hidden states to vocabulary-sized logits, often constitutes a substantial portion of the model's parameters and computational cost during inference. Existing methods like adaptive softmax or hierarchical softmax introduce structural complexities. In this paper, we propose VQ-Logits, a novel approach that leverages Vector Quantization (VQ) to drastically reduce the parameter count and computational load of the LLM output layer. VQ-Logits replaces the large V * dmodel output embedding matrix with a small, shared codebook of K embedding vectors (K << V ). Each token in the vocabulary is mapped to one of these K codebook vectors. The LLM predicts logits over this compact codebook, which are then efficiently "scattered" to the full vocabulary space using the learned or preassigned mapping. We demonstrate through extensive experiments on standard language modeling benchmarks (e.g., WikiText-103, C4) that VQ-Logits can achieve up to 99% parameter reduction in the output layer and 6x speedup in logit computation, with only a marginal 4% increase in perplexity compared to full softmax baselines. We further provide detailed ablation studies on codebook size, initialization, and learning strategies, showcasing the robustness and effectiveness of our approach.

cs.CL↗