[
    {
        "id": "osp-15569",
        "type": "article-journal",
        "title": "Confidence-Ordering Reversal under Contextual Priors in Neural Decoding",
        "author": [
            {
                "family": "Zhang",
                "given": "Xinyu"
            },
            {
                "family": "Liu",
                "given": "Sichao"
            }
        ],
        "URL": "https://omanscience.com/ar/articles/confidence-ordering-reversal-under-contextual-priors-in-neural-decoding",
        "language": "en",
        "issued": {
            "date-parts": [
                [
                    2026
                ]
            ]
        },
        "abstract": "Contextual priors improve neural-to-language decoding by reshaping candidate scores. However, confidence is read from the same reshaped scores, so the errors a prior leaves behind can become more confident with no change in accuracy to reveal it. We study how a prior shapes confidence in speech retrieval on MEG-MASC and MOUS using local decoding scores, a contextual prior combined by additive shallow fusion, and the fused top-two margin as confidence. Among initially incorrect predictions, we find a confidence-ordering reversal: a larger margin makes a repair more likely when the correct candidate starts near the top of the local ranking, but less likely when it starts lower. On MEG-MASC, pooled correctness AUROC is 0.87, yet AUROC separating repairs from residual errors falls from 0.70 at initial ranks 2-3 to 0.39 at ranks 21-50. Errors starting beyond rank 20, inside the reversed region, make up 46.6% of all post-fusion errors. We propose a score-level account: a repair must first close the correct candidate's initial deficit, limiting its final margin, whereas a residual error can build a large margin between two incorrect candidates. A causal intervention that changes only the fusion weight moves the reversal to deeper ranks as predicted. Under a word-level LM prior, it keeps moving after accuracy gain peaks, so a weight chosen for accuracy does not settle confidence. Reading local and prior scores separately improves selective decoding: the decoder answers on 74.5% of windows instead of 56.7%, while 92% of output sets still contain the correct candidate. Confidence after contextual fusion should retain the local and contextual evidence behind each prediction, not just the fused scores. Project website: https://confidencereversal.github.io/; Code: https://github.com/AmadeusFake/NeuDecodingConfReversal"
    }
]