REVIEW 5 cited by
Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
In many high-risk machine learning applications it is essential for a model to indicate when it is uncertain about a prediction. While large language models (LLMs) can reach and even surpass human-level accuracy on a variety of benchmarks, their overconfidence in incorrect responses is still a well-documented failure mode. Traditional methods for ML uncertainty quantification can be difficult to directly adapt to LLMs due to the computational cost of implementation and closed-source nature of many models. A variety of black-box methods have recently been proposed, but these often rely on heuristics such as self-verbalized confidence. We instead propose a framework for measuring an LLM's uncertainty with respect to the distribution of generated explanations for an answer. While utilizing explanations is not a new idea in and of itself, by interpreting each possible model+explanation pair as a test-time classifier we can calculate a posterior answer distribution over the most likely of these classifiers. We demonstrate how a specific instance of this framework using explanation entailment as our classifier likelihood improves confidence score metrics (in particular AURC and AUROC) over baselines across five different datasets. We believe these results indicate that our framework is both a well-principled and effective way of quantifying uncertainty in LLMs.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
Evaluating Prompt Engineering Techniques for Accuracy and Confidence Elicitation in Medical LLMs
Across 156 configurations on Persian medical board questions, Chain-of-Thought prompting raised accuracy while increasing overconfidence, and emotional prompting inflated confidence without accuracy gains.
-
Rehabilitation Exercise Quality Assessment and Feedback Generation Using Large Language Models with Prompt Engineering
A pre-trained LLM prompted with exercise-specific skeleton features can classify rehabilitation exercise quality with moderate accuracy and generate textual feedback without fine-tuning.
-
Self-Training Large Language Models with Confident Reasoning
CORE-PO self-trains LLMs to prefer reasoning paths with high self-estimated confidence, improving answer and reasoning accuracy on several benchmarks.
-
Confidence Estimation for Text-to-SQL in Large Language Models
Consistency-based methods are the most reliable confidence signal for text-to-SQL in black-box LLMs, and executing queries against a database adds a useful correctness signal.
-
Towards Harmonized Uncertainty Estimation for Large Language Models
CUE combines a supervised correctness classifier with existing LLM uncertainty scores to improve indication, balance, and calibration, reporting AUROC and ECE gains across models and datasets.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.