Ensemble Diversity

The performance ceiling of an LLM team is constrained not only by individual model capabilities, but also by inter-member error resonance and predictive differences. Although heterogeneous teaming is often observed to be effective in practice, existing approaches lack complementarity metrics that are computable, interpretable, and optimizable, leaving team composition to rely on heuristics. We propose a heterogeneity-driven team selection framework that performs offline profiling to characterize individual capability along with two complementary signals: one captures decorrelation in error patterns to reduce co-failures, while the other measures divergence in predictive behavior to capture strategy diversity. We formulate team selection as a standardized quality--complementarity combinatorial objective and apply an efficient greedy search to select a small team from a candidate pool. Experiments across multiple benchmarks demonstrate that our framework consistently outperforms quality-only baselines under controlled candidate pools and team sizes, establishing reusable selection principles for multi-LLM systems.

Stacking heterogeneous vision backbones (CNNs, ViTs, and hybrids) is the de facto recipe for accuracy, calibration, and robustness, yet two coupled pathologies limit its returns. Prediction-space multicollinearity ill-conditions the meta-learner's Gram matrix, inflating weight variance and producing brittle solutions on a thin manifold. Calibration collapse compounds constituent miscalibration through naive linear stacking, so adding more models can hurt expected calibration error (ECE). Existing remedies, ridge regularization, greedy selection, model soups, and SWAG address at most one of these issues, and none jointly target conditioning and calibration in heterogeneous prediction pools. We introduce CORE-STACK+, a preconditioning pipeline with four components: (i) a kernelized redundancy filter that removes non-linear inter-model dependencies invisible to Pearson correlation, using Centered Kernel Alignment (CKA) [23]; (ii) a $<15$K-parameter differentiable meta-feature gate that learns per-sample attention over ensemble statistics; (iii) a spectrum-adaptive Ridge penalty $lambda^{star}=lmax(Chat)/SNR(Chat)$ derived from a Marchenko-Pastur signal-noise decomposition, eliminating nested cross-validation; and (iv) a Laplace-approximate Bayesian blender replacing inverse-RMSE heuristics. We prove a PAC-Bayes excess-risk bound that, for the first time, jointly accounts for prediction-space redundancy and meta-learner capacity. Across six benchmarks, CORE-STACK+ delivers $+1.8\%$ top-1 on ImageNet-1K, $-4.2$ mCE on ImageNet-C, $+0.9$ mIoU on ADE20K, and $+1.3$ AP on COCO, while reducing retained models by 35-57% and inference FLOPs by up to $41$. ECE improves $2.1\times$ over deep ensembles without post hoc temperature scaling.

A panel's human-equivalent size is target-specific. Matching a fixed 32-judge panel to empirical human label distributions on three ChaosNLI tasks yields two distinct effective sizes: distributional-error matching gives $ν_{\mathrm{MSE}}=2.304$, $3.750$, and $3.445$, whereas spectral matching gives $ν_H=4.242$, $6.459$, and $6.499$, a gap of $1.72$--$1.89\times$; a binary-error diagnostic credits the same panels with only $1.971$--$2.227$ effective votes. Extrapolating the distributional-error curve at fixed squared mean residual, mean member variance, and normalized mean covariance gives asymptotes of $2.392$, $3.990$, and $3.655$, with 32 judges already reaching $94.0$--$96.3\%$. An exact spectral identity explains the gap: error depends on member energy and on the orientation of residual variation relative to averaging, information that the participation ratio (PR) discards. A realizable hard-label construction confirms that higher spectral diversity can coexist with worse distribution recovery even under equal member energies and nonnegative correlations, and the consensus direction retains $γ_{\mathrm{co}}=43.8\%$, $33.7\%$, and $35.9\%$ of centered residual variance. An external check on CC-1000, a 1,000-item Civil Comments subset with a different panel, gives $ν_H=2.84$. For panel choice, we establish an existence result and one feasible path: exhaustive enumeration at $k\in\{5,7\}$ shows that panels beating the accuracy-top-$k$ baseline on both accuracy and $ν_H$ always exist, and greedily swapping at most two members reaches $24.8$--$56.0\%$ higher $ν_H$ at $0.10$--$1.10$ percentage points higher accuracy. Our dataset and code are available at https://github.com/Chao1208/32judges-votes.

Spiking Neural Networks (SNNs) are attractive for resource-constrained remote-sensing systems, but reliable out-of-distribution (OOD) detection remains challenging. Deep ensembles provide strong predictive uncertainty, yet require multiple complete models and backbone evaluations. We propose an efficient spiking pseudo-ensemble that attaches multiple lightweight classification heads to a frozen SNN backbone. Naively training these heads with cross-entropy can lead to diversity collapse, where independently parameterized heads may produce correlated predictions. To address this, we introduce an agree--disagree objective that preserves correct predictions on clean in-distribution samples while encouraging diversity on structured, uncertainty-inducing transformations of the same inputs. This provides a diversity-promoting training signal without requiring external OOD data. Experiments with Spikformer and ResNet19-SNN on EuroSAT demonstrate consistent improvements over conventionally trained pseudo-ensembles. Using three backbones with five heads each matches or improves upon a five-model deep ensemble on UCM and AID, while requiring approximately 38% fewer parameters and 40% fewer backbone evaluations. These results show that explicit diversity promotion can recover useful ensemble-style uncertainty at substantially lower deployment cost.

Sixteen language models drawn from ten families produced, on average, the semantic diversity of 1.69 distinct formulations of a psychotherapeutic case, against a single-model baseline of 1.43 from one model's own runs. Ensembles place more than one reading before a decision-maker on the premise that several models supply several perspectives. Dispersion over their outputs is measured both as diversity and as uncertainty, and both traditions validate it against a correctness criterion that this task does not admit. Measuring diversity is a solved problem: the Vendi Score, the exponential of the von Neumann entropy of a similarity matrix, is an effective number of distinct elements. What a single aggregate does not say is where the diversity comes from. We define a per-model dissent contribution, the complement of a model's mean similarity to the other members of its ensemble: a magnitude from the same matrix, not a decomposition of the spectral index, whose maximum identifies the most divergent voice. Crossing model and case, we test as a preregistered hypothesis whether model identity accounts for a non-zero share of the variance in dissent, and characterise the structure that test detects. The panel formulated fifteen stratified vignettes, yielding 7,082 formulations for analysis. Model identity was a detectable structuring factor of the dissent that remained, but the usual categories recovered it only partly: scale differences pointed in opposite directions across pairs, family grouped models on only five two-member lines, and the most divergent voice changed with panel composition, so that the surfaced outlier describes the ensemble rather than the model. Dissent did not track the interpretive openness for which the case bank was stratified; it was organised by clinical content instead, leaving the dispersion an ensemble produces a property to measure rather than assume.

Ensembles are a standard way to improve the performance and robustness of deep neural networks, but their effectiveness crucially depends on both the quality and the diversity of individual models. Most neural architecture search (NAS) methods are computationally expensive. Extending them to neural ensemble search (NES), which requires joint optimization of individual architectures and their ensemble composition, leads to an exponential growth of the search space and makes the problem computationally intractable. To address this, we introduce a dual-objective surrogate-guided ensemble search: candidate architectures are represented as directed acyclic graphs, and two surrogate models are trained independently to estimate predictive accuracy and diversity potential. Their combined estimates guide an NES framework that efficiently identifies architectures that are both individually strong and collectively diverse. Our final ensemble achieves competitive or superior performance compared to standard baselines such as Deep Ensembles and Random Search on FashionMNIST, CIFAR-10, and CIFAR-100.

Deep ensembles provide the most reliable uncertainty estimates in deep learning, but their cost grows linearly with the number of members. Implicit ensembles lower this cost by sharing a single backbone across members. Member diversity is a primary determinant of ensemble quality, yet no implicit ensemble can shape it during training; existing methods fix it at initialisation or build it into the architecture. We introduce $σ$N-Ens, a normalisation-based implicit ensemble that treats each member as a task in a multi-task architecture and modulates the shared backbone through sigmoid-bounded scalers. We also introduce a softmax-temperature regulariser, which shapes the equilibrium level of sharing between members and traces the accuracy-calibration frontier. Because only normalisation layers are replicated, the mechanism can wrap convolutional and transformer backbones alike, also allowing pretrained models to be adapted through a short fine-tune. We frame the epistemic uncertainty such an ensemble expresses as modulation uncertainty, and explain why its calibration holds under input corruption, and why its out-of-distribution detection is weaker. Our method is evaluated across ResNets and transformers on CIFAR-10/100, ImageNet and SST-2. $σ$N-Ens matches or outperforms deep ensembles at a fraction of their parameter cost, scales with ensemble size where partitioning methods collapse, and maintains calibration under distribution shift.

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.

This paper provides an experimentally verified formal law for calculating the uplift that diversity of thought provides in Large Language Model (LLM) ensembles. From first principles, we derive an exact decomposition of LLM ensemble lift into rescue and damage masses, which yields a compact heuristic for calculating uplift. From this we extract the metrics which predict ensemble performance: an accuracy-adjusted correctness correlation, $φ_{\mathrm{adj}}$, together with the accuracy gap and collective accuracy of the pair. We test the law on 767,520 inferences from ten open-weight models over two graduate-level science benchmarks, together with a novel agentic cybersecurity benchmark in which each model conducts digital-forensics investigations by multi-turn tool use in a network-isolated sandbox (23,520 graded trials including abstentions); all votes are released openly. Calibrated once on SuperGPQA at a 40:60 vote split, the heuristic predicts lift on the calibration set with Spearman's $ρ=0.84$ and, with its coefficients frozen, transfers to two datasets never used in calibration ($ρ=0.51$ on GPQA Diamond and $0.84$ on the forensic tasks), whilst the measured swap mass tracks realised lift with $R^2\ge 0.96$ throughout. Raw $φ$ has almost no predictive power ($R^2\le 0.09$ throughout); the accuracy-adjusted $φ_{\mathrm{adj}}$ is markedly superior ($R^2=0.67$ on SuperGPQA), and the heuristic combining these metrics is the most stable pre-pooling predictor across the three datasets.

Subjective NLP tasks often exhibit systematic annotator disagreement, requiring models that represent uncertainty rather than collapse it. We introduce Ensemble Diversity Optimization (EDO), a prediction-space framework that jointly optimizes ensemble weights, effective cardinality, and calibration through a unified differentiable objective. EDO learns ensemble composition and size end-to-end via Gumbel-Softmax relaxation and incorporates a signed diversity regularizer, tuned on validation data, to steer optimization toward either preserving or suppressing disagreement. This regularization prevents ensemble collapse and enables controlled navigation of the utility-calibration trade-off. The framework integrates a soft F1 surrogate, class-weighted cross-entropy to address imbalance, and reliability-weighted diversity to regulate intra-ensemble variability. Experiments on four subjective text-classification benchmarks (ArMIS, ConvAbuse, HS-Brexit, MD-Agreement) show that EDO substantially improves probabilistic calibration, reducing cross-entropy (40-78% depending on baseline) and lowering Brier scores relative to Soft-CE, Soft-MD, Top-5 Voting, and WEL, while maintaining competitive F1 and better alignment with annotator distributions. These results demonstrate that jointly optimizing ensemble structure with a signed diversity regularizer provides an efficient, model-agnostic approach for modeling human subjectivity in supervised learning.

Top AI forecasting systems are approaching superforecaster-level accuracy on future world events, but still rely primarily on off-the-shelf LLMs combined with forecasting-specific context gathering and scaffolding. We study how to improve this recipe through ensembling: given a fixed number of samples, which off-the-shelf model forecasts should be combined to maximize accuracy? On binary questions from the Metaculus AI Benchmark, we find that individual accuracy is not enough: many frontier LLMs make highly correlated predictions, limiting the value of additional forecasts from the same or similar models. Instead, the strongest ensembles combine accurate but diverse forecasters, with models such as \model{Grok 4} contributing disproportionately because their predictions are less correlated with other frontier LLMs. These results suggest that the strength of the AI crowd comes not from sampling more forecasts indiscriminately, but from combining forecasts across models with complementary errors, motivating forecasting systems that explicitly optimize for both model quality and diversity.

While sequential residual fitting is the bedrock of standard boosting frameworks, it inherently breeds learner redundancy by repeatedly revisiting correlated error components. To address this bottleneck, we propose a shift from residual fitting to \textit{residual orthogonalization} and introduce SCBoost. Our framework tackles redundancy through two complementary mechanisms: Spectral Residual Projection (SRP) and Covariance-Regularized Weighting (CRW). During training, SRP projects each residual target onto the orthogonal complement of the historical prediction subspace, forcing successive learners to capture only novel empirical innovations. During aggregation, CRW optimizes ensemble weights on a validation set with an explicit covariance penalty to mitigate remaining correlations. Theoretically, we provide a finite-sample geometric characterization proving that SRP yields an exact additive residual-energy decomposition. Furthermore, under an isotropic-noise assumption, we rigorously establish the conditions under which this projection improves the effective Signal-to-Noise Ratio. Extensive experiments across ten benchmark datasets demonstrate that SCBoost delivers strong out-of-the-box performance, particularly in accuracy and F1 score. This work reinterprets boosting through a geometric lens, suggesting that explicit redundancy control is a principled and necessary step toward more efficient ensemble architectures.

Test-time compute (TTC) strategies have emerged as a lightweight approach to boost reasoning in large language models (LLMs). However, their application and benefits for vision-language models (VLMs) remain underexplored. We present a systematic study of TTC across seven VLMs and six benchmarks, specifically analyzing feature-based scoring and majority voting methods. We find that feature heuristics fail and voting yields only modest gains in single-model settings. We theoretically show that this limitation stems from a lack of prediction diversity: when outputs are highly correlated, voting provides little benefit. In contrast, multi-model ensembles offer richer diversity, yet standard majority voting fails to account for varying model capabilities. To address this, we propose Entropy-based TTC (ETTC), which selects the most confident prediction based on predictive entropy. Our method reduces to majority voting in the single-model case, but in model ensembles, it leverages confidence disparities to prioritize stronger models. We prove that ETTC outperforms majority voting under mild assumptions and empirically demonstrate that it consistently surpasses both voting and the best individual model. Crucially, our results show that smaller models can synergistically enhance larger ones, unlocking ensembling gains not achievable with standard strategies.

Text-to-SQL ensembles improve over single-candidate generation by drawing multiple SQL candidates and selecting one, but their effectiveness is bounded by Pass@K, the probability that at least one of K candidates is correct. Existing methods source diversity heuristically through stochastic decoding or prompt variants, leaving candidate sets dominated by correlated failures. We present DivSkill-SQL, a residual skill optimization framework that builds complementary agentic Text-to-SQL ensembles without model fine-tuning: each new skill is optimized on examples the current skill ensemble fails on, provably targeting its marginal contribution to Pass@K. On Spider2-Lite, DivSkill-SQL improves selected accuracy by up to +11.1 points on Snowflake and +8.3 on BigQuery over the strongest ensemble baseline, with consistent gains across two base models (Opus-4.6 and GPT-5.4). Skills optimized on a single dialect transfer without retraining across dialects (Snowflake, BigQuery, SQLite) and to a different task formulation, such as BIRD-Critic (+2.6 pts). Error diagnostics show up to 3x fewer hallucinated schema references and function calls, indicating that gains come from genuinely reliable complementary skills rather than surface-form variation.

Tabular foundation models (TFMs) now match or beat tuned gradient-boosted trees on a growing fraction of tabular tasks, but no single TFM wins on every dataset. Ensembling is the go to fix here, and it works less well than expected. Six modern TFMs form a near-redundant pool: their mean pairwise Q-statistic is $0.961$, close enough to $1$ that any convex combination is bounded above. We benchmark six ensemble strategies over six TFMs on 153 OpenML classification tasks. The best ensemble, two-level cascade stacking, buys $+0.18\%$ accuracy over the strongest single TFM at $253\times$ the compute. A Friedman and Nemenyi analysis places three ensembles and the best base TFM in a single equivalence group; three other ensembles are significantly \emph{worse} than the best base. Stacking with a logistic-regression meta-learner is the most striking case: competitive accuracy and ROC-AUC, the worst log-loss rank among the ensembles. The meta-learner improves accuracy by sharpening class boundaries, which destroys calibration. We recommend greedy selection as the practical default.

Recent tabular learning benchmarks increasingly show a tight performance cluster rather than a clear hierarchy among leading methods, spanning gradient boosted decision trees, attention-based architectures, and implicit ensembles such as TabM. As benchmark gains plateau, a complementary goal is to understand and control the mechanisms that make simple neural tabular models competitive. We propose LoMETab, a rank-$r$ generalization of multiplicative implicit ensembles. LoMETab lifts the rank-1 BatchEnsemble/TabM modulation to a rank-$r$ identity-residual Hadamard family by parameterizing each member weight as $W_k = W \odot (1 + A_kB_k^\top)$, where $W$ is shared and $(A_k, B_k)$ are member-specific low-rank factors. This exposes two practical diversity-control axes: the adapter rank $r$ and the initialization scale $σ_{\mathrm{init}}$, and we prove that for $r \ge 2$ this generalization strictly enlarges BatchEnsemble's hypothesis class. Empirically, we show that this added capacity manifests as measurable predictive diversity after training: on representative classification datasets, LoMETab sustains higher pairwise KL than an additive low-rank ablation, and $(r, σ_{\mathrm{init}})$ provides broad control over pairwise KL, varying by up to several orders of magnitude across configurations. The induced diversity is reflected in task-appropriate output-level measures: argmax disagreement for classification and ambiguity for regression, indicating that the control extends beyond pairwise KL to decision- and output-level member variation. Finally, experiments sweeping over adapter rank $r$ and initialization scale $σ_{\mathrm{init}}$ reveal that predictive performance is dataset-dependent over the $(r, σ_{\mathrm{init}})$ grid, supporting LoMETab as a controllable family of implicit ensembles rather than a fixed rank-1 construction.