# Making, not Taking, the Best of N

Source: [Making, not Taking, the Best of N](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa7bc51e209131cea8a52a>)

Collection index: [llms.txt](<https://www.sota2.com/research/llms.txt>)

Data updated: 2025-10-26T05:48:24.291Z

Authors: Ammar Khairi, Daniel D'souza, Marzieh Fadaee, Julia Kreutzer

Published: 2025-10-01T14:14:31.000Z

## Abstract

Obtaining high-quality generations in modern LLMs has largely been framed as a selection problem: identifying a single winning generation from a diverse pool of N samples, the Best-of-N (BoN). Yet, this approach is inherently zero-sum, discarding diverse and potentially useful information from the pool. Instead, we explore a collaborative setup, where all candidates can potentially contribute to the final winning generation. To this end, we propose Fusion-of-N (FusioN): a method that uses a general LLM judge to synthesize the most informative elements of each sample into a single final answer. We compare FusioN to BoN in two settings, (i) test-time scaling, where we sample and aggregate from a single model at test-time (ii) synthetic data generation, where we fuse samples from a pool of diverse teachers to improve a student model. We extensively benchmark both setups across 11 languages, 3 diverse tasks and varying model scales. Across the bench, FusioN consistently outperforms BoN showing versatility and robustness both in test-time scaling and in downstream gains from synthetic data generation. We also perform extensive analysis on FusioN, where it shows surprising strengths and robustness under challenging settings. These results show that we should shift how we think about evaluating and utilizing LLM generations from a monolithic measure of quality, to embracing their polylithic nature. This shift allows us to integrate diverse strengths, unlock latent potential, and achieve improvements that were previously inaccessible through selection alone.

## Recorded benchmark results

A research result applies to its stated dataset, split, metric and evaluation configuration. Compare like-for-like settings, preserve the metric's unit and direction, and distinguish paper-reported results from independent reproduction. The best result recorded here is not a claim of exhaustive, current global coverage.

- [Opinion Summarization on Rotten Tomatoes (full dataset)](<https://www.sota2.com/research/sota/opinion-summarization-on-rotten-tomatoes-full-dataset.md>): Opinion Summarization; Rotten Tomatoes (full dataset); Coverage: 7.17.

## Original sources and implementation

[Original paper](<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.00931>)

[PDF](<https://arxiv.org/pdf/2510.00931.pdf>)
