mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Reconfidencing LLMs from the Grouping Loss Perspective

arXiv 2402.04957 ↗First posted 7 Feb 2024cs.CLcited by 11

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs), including ChatGPT and LLaMA, are susceptible to generating hallucinated answers in a confident tone. While efforts to elicit and calibrate confidence scores have proven useful, recent findings show that controlling uncertainty must go beyond calibration: predicted scores may deviate significantly from the actual posterior probabilities due to the impact of grouping loss. In this work, we construct a new evaluation dataset derived from a knowledge base to assess confidence scores given to answers of Mistral and LLaMA. Experiments show that they tend to be overconfident. Further, we show that they are more overconfident on some answers than others, eg depending on the nationality of the person in the query. In uncertainty-quantification theory, this is grouping loss. To address this, we propose a solution to reconfidence LLMs, canceling not only calibration but also grouping loss. The LLMs, after the reconfidencing process, indicate improved confidence alignment with the accuracy of their responses.

Key facts. Cited by 11 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Feb 2024.

Builds on

24 of 42 references.

References · 24

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  2. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
  3. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
  4. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
  5. 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,975
  6. 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,955
  7. 2017A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inferencecited by 2,682
  8. 2020DeBERTa: Decoding-enhanced BERT with Disentangled Attentioncited by 2,181
  9. 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,856
  10. 2023Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMscited by 974
  11. 2023Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedbackcited by 812
  12. 2023CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquingcited by 783
12 more
  1. 2017Crowdsourcing Multiple Choice Science Questionscited by 765
  2. 2022Teaching Models to Express Their Uncertainty in Wordscited by 751
  3. 2018CoQA: A Conversational Question Answering Challengecited by 683
  4. 2021A Survey of Uncertainty in Deep Neural Networkscited by 680
  5. 2023The Internal State of an LLM Knows When It's Lyingcited by 659
  6. 2020How Can We Know When Language Models Know? On the Calibration of Language Models for Question Answeringcited by 445
  7. 2020Reducing conversational agents' overconfidence through linguistic calibrationcited by 210
  8. 2023Do Language Models Know When They're Hallucinating References?cited by 116
  9. 2022Uncertainty Quantification with Pre-trained Language Models: A Large-Scale Empirical Analysiscited by 104
  10. 2023Uncertainty in Natural Language Generation: From Theory to Applicationscited by 61
  11. 2022Beyond calibration: estimating the grouping loss of modern neural networkscited by 32
  12. 2022On the Calibration of Pre-trained Language Models using Mixup Guided by Area Under the Margin and Saliencycited by 31

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 4; 2025: 7.

11 papers.