# Uncertainty as Feature Gaps: Epistemic Uncertainty Quantification of LLMs in Contextual Question-Answering

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.02671 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.02671/

## Key facts

- Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 34 of its 41 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 3 Oct 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 34)

- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1506.02142/) (2015)
- [HotpotQA: A Dataset for Diverse, Explainable Multi-hop Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.09600/) (2018)
- [RULER: What's the Real Context Size of Your Long-Context Language Models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.06654/) (2024)
- [Representation Engineering: A Top-Down Approach to AI Transparency](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01405/) (2023)
- [Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty in Machine Learning: An Introduction to Concepts and Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.09457/) (2019)
- [Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.09664/) (2023)
- [Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14975/) (2023)
- [The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.03658/) (2023)
- [What learning algorithm is in-context learning? Investigations with linear models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.15661/) (2022)
- [The Internal State of an LLM Knows When It's Lying](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.13734/) (2023)
- [The NarrativeQA Reading Comprehension Challenge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1712.07040/) (2017)
- [A Dataset of Information-Seeking Questions and Answers Anchored in Research Papers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.03011/) (2021)
- [Entity-Based Knowledge Conflicts in Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.05052/) (2021)
- [INSIDE: LLMs' Internal States Retain the Power of Hallucination Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03744/) (2024)
- [Emergent Linear Representations in World Models of Self-Supervised Sequence Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.00941/) (2023)
- [Generating with Confidence: Uncertainty Quantification for Black-box Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.19187/) (2023)
- [MiniCheck: Efficient Fact-Checking of LLMs on Grounding Documents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.10774/) (2024)
- [Kernel Language Entropy: Fine-grained Uncertainty Quantification for LLMs from Semantic Similarities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.20003/) (2024)
- [Shifting Attention to Relevance: Towards the Predictive Uncertainty Quantification of Free-Form Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.01379/) (2023)
- [Lookback Lens: Detecting and Mitigating Contextual Hallucinations in Large Language Models Using Only Attention Maps](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.07071/) (2024)
- [To Believe or Not to Believe Your LLM](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.02543/) (2024)
- [Benchmarking Uncertainty Quantification Methods for Large Language Models with LM-Polygraph](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.15627/) (2024)
- [MARS: Meaning-Aware Response Scoring for Uncertainty Estimation in Generative LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.11756/) (2024)
- [Learning without training: The implicit dynamics of in-context learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.16003/) (2025)
- [From Risk to Uncertainty: Generating Predictive Uncertainty Measures via Bayesian Estimation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10727/) (2024)
- [Do Not Design, Learn: A Trainable Scoring Function for Uncertainty Estimation in Generative LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11278/) (2024)
- [Rethinking Uncertainty Estimation in LLMs: A Principled Single-Sequence Measure](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15176/) (2024)
- [Reconsidering LLM Uncertainty Estimation Methods in the Wild](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.01114/) (2025)
- [On Information-Theoretic Measures of Predictive Uncertainty](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.10786/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [Uncertainty Quantification for Hallucination Detection in Large Language Models: Foundations, Methodology, and Future Directions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.12040/) (2025)
- [Balancing Classification and Calibration Performance in Decision-Making LLMs via Calibration Aware Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.13284/) (2026)
- [Position: agentic AI orchestration should be Bayes-consistent](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.00742/) (2026)
- [Towards Generation-Efficient Uncertainty Estimation in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.06053/) (2026)
- [The Origins of Stochasticity: Comprehensive Investigations on Uncertainty Quantification for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.22792/) (2026)
- [Bayesian Sparse Low-Rank Adaptation for Large Language Model Uncertainty Estimation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.02182/) (2026)
- [Know Thy Reasoner: Not All Language Models Explore Alike](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.10827/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) research has primarily focused on closed-book factual question answering (QA), while contextual QA remains unexplored, despite its importance in real-world applications. In this work, we focus on UQ for the contextual QA task and propose a theoretically grounded approach to quantify epistemic uncertainty. We begin by introducing a task-agnostic, token-level uncertainty measure defined as the cross-entropy between the predictive distribution of the given model and the unknown true distribution. By decomposing this measure, we isolate the epistemic component and approximate the true distribution by a perfectly prompted, idealized model. We then derive an upper bound for epistemic uncertainty and show that it can be interpreted as semantic feature gaps in the given model's hidden representations relative to the ideal model. We further apply this generic framework to the contextual QA task and hypothesize that three features approximate this gap: context-reliance (using the provided context rather than parametric knowledge), context comprehension (extracting relevant information from context), and honesty (avoiding intentional lies). Using a top-down interpretability approach, we extract these features by using only a small number of labeled samples and ensemble them to form a robust uncertainty score. Experiments on multiple QA benchmarks in both in-distribution and out-of-distribution settings show that our method substantially outperforms state-of-the-art unsupervised (sampling-free and sampling-based) and supervised UQ methods, achieving up to a 13-point PRR improvement while incurring a negligible inference overhead.