arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language · · 3 min read

Are Diversity Metrics Measuring Diversity? A Capability-Controlled Audit of Majority-Vote Gain in LLM Ensembles

Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.

Computer Science > Computation and Language

arXiv:2607.20768 (cs)
[Submitted on 22 Jul 2026]

Title:Are Diversity Metrics Measuring Diversity? A Capability-Controlled Audit of Majority-Vote Gain in LLM Ensembles

Authors:Donghwan Kim
View a PDF of the paper titled Are Diversity Metrics Measuring Diversity? A Capability-Controlled Audit of Majority-Vote Gain in LLM Ensembles, by Donghwan Kim
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Majority voting over LLMs is widely assumed to benefit from diversity, and diversity measures are used to choose which models to combine. We ask whether five such measures track diversity or mainly re-express capability, auditing them as predictors of majority-vote gain over the best member across 31,900 subsets of 30 LLMs on MMLU-Pro (29 on TruthfulQA) under explicit capability controls. Three findings emerge. First, latent complementarity is ubiquitous: oracle gain is positive in 100% of subsets, yet simple voting beats the strongest member in only 9.98% of all canonical size-3 subsets (18.71% with held-out best selection); the pooled size-2-4 rate is 1.27%, partly reflecting deterministic even-size voting behavior. Second, a joint-correctness proxy (strict diversity) is nearly collinear with one minus mean accuracy (size-3 Spearman rho = +0.991 / +0.988); raw diversity-gain associations are strongly capability-entangled and, with one exception, unstable under control. Third, three linear contingency-table statistics are algebraically non-separable; after capability control, the empirically stable remainder is a modest residual pairwise co-failure association in which more shared error corresponds to lower gain. This direction is robust, but its magnitude is configuration-dependent. Joint rawspace linear regressions treating strict diversity, disagreement, and double-fault as independent predictors are rank-deficient by construction.
Comments: 10 figures, 9 tables
Subjects: Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
Cite as: arXiv:2607.20768 [cs.CL]
  (or arXiv:2607.20768v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.20768
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Donghwan Kim [view email]
[v1] Wed, 22 Jul 2026 22:34:57 UTC (2,850 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled Are Diversity Metrics Measuring Diversity? A Capability-Controlled Audit of Majority-Vote Gain in LLM Ensembles, by Donghwan Kim
  • View PDF
  • HTML (experimental)
  • TeX Source

Current browse context:

cs.CL
< prev   |   next >
Change to browse by:

References & Citations

Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

loading...
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy Reddit
Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.

Sign in →

No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.

More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language