MEGA Hub

Best-of-Evidence: Best-of-N Selection under Partial Verification

Authors

Do you know Cenwei Zhang?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Teng Fang?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Yuxia Wang?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Derek Li?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Bryan Dai?You can claim authorship or link another user.Do you know Lei You?You can claim authorship or link another user.

Abstract

BoN improves model outputs by sampling several candidates and selecting one with a proxy score, but it assumes that complete candidates can be evaluated reliably. Many vision-language tasks instead provide only partial verification: a finding, span, value, region, or relation may be checkable even when no dependable whole-response verifier exists. Moreover, the same claim may recur across candidates with opposing stances, allowing one observation to support part of the pool and contradict another. We introduce Best-of-Evidence (BoE), an inference-time selection framework that keeps the BoN candidate pool fixed, represents reusable claims with a signed candidate--factor graph, and allocates a limited budget to evidence actions that can change the final choice. BoE formalizes selection under partial verification and provides a practical score-based controller, with the zero-budget case recovering the underlying BoN decision. Theoretically, we show that residual evidence capacity limits any evidence-driven improvement and that shared factor queries can achieve an O(log K) versus Θ(K) query separation in a factor-code model. Common-ledger experiments on four medical VQA settings show that BoE can improve fixed-pool selection and rescue some BoN failures when evidence is reliable, contrastive, and decision-relevant, while also revealing the channel-quality and candidate-generation limits that prevent universal gains.

Community

00

Publication notes

Author note
3 figures, 28 pages