arXiv:2603. 29466v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Existing methods for quantifying predictive uncertainty in neural networks are either computationally intractable for large language models or require access to training data that is typically unavailable.
arXiv:2606. 02093v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The task of Error Prediction, namely predicting whether a model output is correct, is commonly tackled with Uncertainty Quantification (UQ).
arXiv:2604.08974v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Uncertainty quantification techniques measure confidence in language model outputs to support critical applications like hallucination detection an...
arXiv:2608. 07827v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Confidence estimation for large language models (LLMs) aims to estimate the probability that a generated answer is correct, while calibration aligns these estimates with empirical accuracy.
arXiv:2607. 22554v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) often achieve strong accuracy on benchmarks, yet it remains unclear how reliably they apply this knowledge when the same question is phrased in different but equivalent ways.
As the chain-of-thought reasoning capabilities of large language models improve, evaluating and calibrating their reasoning confidence is becoming increasingly important for quantifying the uncertaint...
The paper introduces Divergent Token Confidence (DTC), a method that estimates large language model confidence by counting tokens where two models strongly disagree during decoding. DTC uses Jensen-Shannon divergence between next-token distributions along the same reasoning trajectory and shows a near-negative correlation with answer accuracy. Experiments on multiple model families and six mathematical benchmarks demonstrate that DTC improves calibration over traditional probability-based and verbalized baselines, achieving lower expected calibration errors in both white-box and black-box settings.
arXiv:2607. 07626v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reliable confidence estimation is essential for deploying large language models (LLMs) in confidence-aware systems, where downstream decisions such as retrieval, tool use, and adaptive computation depend on accurately estimating answer reliability.
The paper introduces Label-Confidence-Aware Uncertainty Quantification (LCA-UQ), a method that uses Pointwise Kullback-Leibler divergence to align global entropy from multiple stochastic samples with the local confidence of a candidate answer. By bridging this gap, LCA-UQ improves the reliability and stability of uncertainty assessments in natural language generation. Experiments on popular LLMs and NLP datasets show that label sources significantly influence classification and that LCA-UQ outperforms existing uncertainty estimation approaches.
arXiv:2512.14177v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) often produce plausible but unreliable outputs, making robust uncertainty estimation essential. Recent work on...
The paper presents the first large‑scale benchmark for uncertainty quantification (UQ) calibration in long‑form scientific question answering, evaluating four UQ methods on 685,000 responses from up to 20 large language models across seven datasets. It shows that instruction tuning leads to token‑level probability polarization, undermining token‑level uncertainty signals, while reasoning model families differ in how they handle this effect. Only semantic consistency—consistency of the final answer—provides well‑calibrated outputs, demonstrating that semantic calibration remains robust in multi‑step, dependency‑rich reasoning.
arXiv:2606. 32012v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Uncertainty estimation has been a long-standing challenge in AI models; it amounts to "knowing what you don't know," and metacognition is notoriously difficult even for humans (cf.
The paper argues that large language models cannot achieve perfect reliability for any task, even with unlimited scale. It establishes that each generative task has an inherent reliability ceiling set by how much output uncertainty can be resolved from observable context, with a resolvable part that can be improved by more context and a subjective part tied to task ambiguity. The authors derive a scaling law showing that performance is limited by the scarcer resource—either training data or model capacity—and explain how this law explains phenomena such as retrieval augmentation and catastrophic forgetting.