The Illusion of Robustness: Aggregate Accuracy Hides Prediction Flips under Task-Irrelevant Context

As large language models (LLMs) grow more capable, they are increasingly deployed in context-rich settings where task inputs are often accompanied by long, partially irrelevant context. In a controlled setting, we find that state-of-the-art models often appear robust to task-irrelevant context at the aggregate level: prepending it to benchmark questions causes little change in overall accuracy. This aggregate stability, however, masks significant per-example instability. Even semantically meaningless pseudo-words, formed by randomly combining characters, can markedly shift model predictions on a small fraction of examples, degrading performance on some while improving it on others. This two-sided effect holds consistently across a wide range of models and datasets, yet the affected examples are largely model-specific. We further show that this instability is modulated by context type, context length, test-time compute, and model development stage. Together, our findings reveal context-induced tail risks concealed by aggregate accuracy, motivating per-example reliability evaluation of language models.

Which Tokens Need Context? A Reference-Based Analysis of Translation Responsibility Using Fertility and Entropy

When humans translate, not every word depends equally on the surrounding context. Some tokens, particularly function words like pronouns and auxiliaries, rely heavily on preceding or following sentences, while others, such as proper nouns, do not. Understanding this inherent context sensitivity is essential for evaluating whether machine translation systems use context in human-like ways. However, existing approaches to analysing context usage rely on discourse-specific test sets or model internals, making them narrow or model-dependent. We propose a post-hoc, model-agnostic framework to quantify context sensitivity at lexical and syntactic levels using two measures derived from word alignments: fertility (number of target tokens generated per source token) and entropy (stability of fertility patterns across contexts). Using reference translations for three language pairs (German $\leftrightarrow$ English, English $\rightarrow$ Hindi) under four context conditions, we show that context selectively redistributes generative responsibility from source to context tokens without altering overall fertility. Function words show the largest fertility reductions, while content words remain stable, suggesting that context resolves ambiguity rather than adding new information. Our framework provides a ground-truth characterisation of selective context usage in human translation, establishing a diagnostic baseline for evaluating machine translation models.