Estimating Semantic Alphabet Size for LLM Uncertainty Quantification
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Many black-box techniques for quantifying the uncertainty of large language models (LLMs) rely on repeated LLM sampling, which can be computationally expensive. Therefore, practical applicability demands reliable estimation from few samples. Semantic entropy (SE) is a popular sample-based uncertainty estimator with a discrete formulation attractive for the black-box setting. Recent extensions of SE exhibit improved LLM hallucination detection, but do so with less interpretable methods that admit additional hyperparameters. For this reason, we revisit the canonical discrete semantic entropy (DSE) estimator, finding that it underestimates the "true" semantic entropy, as expected from theory. We propose a modified semantic alphabet size estimator, and illustrate that using it to adjust DSE for sample coverage results in more accurate SE estimation in our setting of interest. Furthermore, we find that two semantic alphabet size estimators, including our proposed, flag incorrect LLM responses as well or better than many top-performing alternatives, with the added benefit of remaining highly interpretable.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 65 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Sep 2025.
Builds on
26 of 65 references.
References · 26
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 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
- 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,455
- 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,075
- 2024Gemma 2: Improving Open Language Models at a Practical Sizecited by 1,998
- 2024Phi-3 Technical Report: A Highly Capable Language Model Locally on Your Phonecited by 1,917
- 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,856
- 2025Gemma 3 Technical Reportcited by 1,824
- 2018Know What You Don't Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuADcited by 1,554
- 2021DeBERTaV3: Improving DeBERTa using ELECTRA-Style Pre-Training with Gradient-Disentangled Embedding Sharingcited by 1,254
- 2023Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generationcited by 819
14 more
- 2023SelfCheckGPT: Zero-Resource Black-Box Hallucination Detection for Generative Large Language Modelscited by 810
- 2023Generating with Confidence: Uncertainty Quantification for Black-box Large Language Modelscited by 293
- 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
- 2020Reducing conversational agents' overconfidence through linguistic calibrationcited by 210
- 2024Kernel Language Entropy: Fine-grained Uncertainty Quantification for LLMs from Semantic Similaritiescited by 159
- 2025Uncertainty Quantification and Confidence Calibration in Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 95
- 2024Improving Uncertainty Quantification in Large Language Models via Semantic Embeddingscited by 30
- 2021Uncertainty quantification in the Bradley-Terry-Luce modelcited by 29
- 2025Beyond Semantic Entropy: Boosting LLM Uncertainty Quantification with Pairwise Semantic Similaritycited by 28
- 2024Distinguishing Ignorance from Error in LLM Hallucinationscited by 14
- 2023Survey on Leveraging Uncertainty Estimation Towards Trustworthy Deep Neural Networks: The Case of Reject Option and Post-training Processingcited by 7
- 2024Variability Need Not Imply Error: The Case of Adequate but Semantically Distinct Responsescited by 2
- 2025Evaluating the Unseen Capabilities: How Many Theorems Do LLMs Know?cited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 8.
8 papers.
- 2026Credal Large Language Models for Semantic Commitment under Uncertaintycited by 2
- 2026Mind the Unseen Mass: Unmasking LLM Hallucinations via Soft-Hybrid Alphabet Estimationcited by 0
- 2026TUR-DPO: Topology- and Uncertainty-Aware Direct Preference Optimizationcited by 0
- 2026Position: Uncertainty Quantification in LLMs is Just Unsupervised Clusteringcited by 0
- 2026From Tokens to Semantics: Leveraging Complementary Signals for Hallucination Detection in Black-Box LLMscited by 0
- 2026"very likely" Means "uncertain"? How LLMs Diverge from Humans in Linguistic Uncertainty Quantificationcited by 0
- 2026Rarity Determines Minimax Rates of Semantic Entropy From Weak Pairwise Judgments With a Known Channelcited by 0
- 2026Can LLM Agents Efficiently Identify Appliance Faults? Insights From Diagnosing a Simulated Appliancecited by 0
- 2026Can LLM Agents Efficiently Identify Appliance Faults? Insights From Diagnosing a Simulated Appliance13 Oct 2026
- 2026Rarity Determines Minimax Rates of Semantic Entropy From Weak Pairwise Judgments With a Known Channel13 Oct 2026
- 2026"very likely" Means "uncertain"? How LLMs Diverge from Humans in Linguistic Uncertainty Quantification6 Sep 2026
- 2026From Tokens to Semantics: Leveraging Complementary Signals for Hallucination Detection in Black-Box LLMs2 Sep 2026
- 2026Credal Large Language Models for Semantic Commitment under Uncertainty24 Aug 2026
- 2026Position: Uncertainty Quantification in LLMs is Just Unsupervised Clustering19 May 2026
- 2026TUR-DPO: Topology- and Uncertainty-Aware Direct Preference Optimization30 Apr 2026
- 2026Mind the Unseen Mass: Unmasking LLM Hallucinations via Soft-Hybrid Alphabet Estimation21 Apr 2026