From Confidence to Collapse in LLM Factual Robustness
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Ensuring the robustness of factual knowledge in LLMs is critical for reliable applications in tasks such as question answering and reasoning. However, existing evaluation methods predominantly focus on performance-based metrics, often investigating from the perspective of prompt perturbations, which captures only the externally triggered side of knowledge robustness. To bridge this gap, we introduce a principled approach to measure factual robustness from the perspective of the generation process by analyzing token distribution entropy in combination with temperature scaling sensitivity. These two factors build the Factual Robustness Score (FRS), a novel metric which quantifies the stability of a fact against perturbations in decoding conditions, given its initial uncertainty. To validate our approach, we conduct extensive experiments on 5 LLMs across 3 closed-book QA datasets (SQuAD, TriviaQA, and HotpotQA). We show that factual robustness varies significantly -- smaller models report an FRS of 0.76, larger ones 0.93 -- with accuracy degrading by ~60% under increased uncertainty. These insights demonstrate how entropy and temperature scaling impact factual accuracy, and lay a foundation for developing more robust knowledge retention and retrieval in future models.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Aug 2025.
Builds on
20 of 30 references.
References · 20
- 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 14,132
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2019DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lightercited by 4,307
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
- 2018HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answeringcited by 3,754
- 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,955
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2019Language Models as Knowledge Bases?cited by 1,936
- 2020Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Are Key-Value Memoriescited by 1,336
- 2020On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 900
- 2020How Much Knowledge Can You Pack Into the Parameters of a Language Model?cited by 719
- 2021Knowledge Neurons in Pretrained Transformerscited by 601
8 more
- 2021Editing Factual Knowledge in Language Modelscited by 553
- 2023An LLM can Fool Itself: A Prompt-Based Adversarial Attackcited by 116
- 2020GO FIGURE: A Meta Evaluation of Factuality in Summarizationcited by 76
- 2024Factual Confidence of LLMs: on Reliability and Robustness of Current Estimatorscited by 61
- 2023Do Large Language Models Know about Facts?cited by 51
- 2024EDT: Improving Large Language Models' Generation by Entropy-based Dynamic Temperature Samplingcited by 45
- 2024ComparisonQA: Evaluating Factuality Robustness of LLMs Through Knowledge Frequency Control and Uncertaintycited by 10
- 2024LLM Robustness Against Misinformation in Biomedical Question Answeringcited by 5
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.