Toward Better Generalisation in Uncertainty Estimators: Leveraging Data-Agnostic Features
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large Language Models (LLMs) often generate responses that are factually incorrect yet expressed with high confidence, which can pose serious risks for end users. To address this, it is essential for LLMs not only to produce answers but also to provide accurate estimates of their correctness. Uncertainty quantification methods have been introduced to assess the quality of LLM outputs, with factual accuracy being a key aspect of that quality. Among these methods, those that leverage hidden states to train probes have shown particular promise, as these internal representations encode information relevant to the factuality of responses, making this approach the focus of this paper. However, the probe trained on the hidden states of one dataset often struggles to generalise to another dataset of a different task or domain. To address this limitation, we explore combining data-agnostic features with hidden-state features and assess whether this hybrid feature set enhances out-of-domain performance. We further examine whether selecting only the most informative hidden-state features, thereby discarding task-specific noise, enables the data-agnostic features to contribute more effectively. The experiment results indicate that although introducing data-agnostic features generally enhances generalisation performance in most cases, in certain scenarios their inclusion degrades performance. A similar pattern emerges when retaining only the most important hidden-state features - adding data-agnostic features does not consistently further enhance performance compared to using the full set of hidden-state features. A closer analysis reveals that, in some specific cases, the trained probe underweights the data-agnostic features relative to the hidden-state features, which we believe is the main reason why the results are inconclusive.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 27 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Jul 2025.
Builds on
27 of 34 references.
References · 27
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
- 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,708
- 2022PaLM: Scaling Language Modeling with Pathwayscited by 5,326
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
- 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,164
- 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,955
- 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,856
- 2023Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMscited by 974
- 2017RACE: Large-scale ReAding Comprehension Dataset From Examinationscited by 861
- 2023SelfCheckGPT: Zero-Resource Black-Box Hallucination Detection for Generative Large Language Modelscited by 810
15 more
- 2022Teaching Models to Express Their Uncertainty in Wordscited by 751
- 2023The Internal State of an LLM Knows When It's Lyingcited by 659
- 2018SWAG: A Large-Scale Adversarial Dataset for Grounded Commonsense Inferencecited by 333
- 2024Semantic Entropy Probes: Robust and Cheap Hallucination Detection in LLMscited by 259
- 2024LLMs Know More Than They Show: On the Intrinsic Representation of LLM Hallucinationscited by 244
- 2023Shifting Attention to Relevance: Towards the Predictive Uncertainty Quantification of Free-Form Large Language Modelscited by 150
- 2024A Survey on Uncertainty Quantification of Large Language Models: Taxonomy, Open Research Challenges, and Future Directionscited by 121
- 2024Uncertainty Estimation and Quantification for LLMs: A Simple Supervised Approachcited by 76
- 2024Calibrating Large Language Models Using Their Generations Onlycited by 65
- 2024Factual Confidence of LLMs: on Reliability and Robustness of Current Estimatorscited by 61
- 2024Do LLMs Know about Hallucination? An Empirical Investigation of LLM's Hidden Statescited by 52
- 2024InternalInspector I2: Robust Confidence Estimation in LLMs through Internal Statescited by 30
- 2024On the Universal Truthfulness Hyperplane Inside LLMscited by 24
- 2024Are Large Language Models More Honest in Their Probabilistic or Verbalized Confidence?cited by 23
- 2024Prompt-Guided Internal States for Hallucination Detection of Large Language Modelscited by 8
Built on by
Not cited yet.