The Computational Basis of Confidence in Large Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Reliable confidence -- the probability that a model's own answer is correct -- is essential for the trustworthy deployment of language models. Existing work has largely evaluated confidence by how well it predicts correctness and whether it is calibrated, leaving open a more fundamental question: what does the confidence signal itself represent? Answer logits may reflect a latent decision variable sufficient to compute normative confidence, or instead a heuristic preference signal that combines the available evidence in a non-Bayesian manner. We address this using statistical decision confidence (SDC), a normative framework from computational neuroscience. Treating the answer-logit difference (LD) as a candidate readout of the latent decision variable, we test the qualitative signatures predicted by SDC. Across three perceptual discrimination tasks and a memory-based decision task, spanning three multimodal non-reasoning models and one reasoning model, LD satisfied these signatures -- including the diagnostic correct/error folded-X pattern -- showing that, in these settings, answer logits behave as monotonic readouts of a latent decision variable rather than heuristic preference scores. In complex visual reasoning, LD continued to predict correctness beyond objective task difficulty, but the full geometric signatures of SDC were absent, illustrating the current boundary of the framework when explicit normative process models are unavailable. These results provide a computational account of confidence in multimodal language models, delineate when answer logits behave as readouts of a latent decision variable, and establish SDC as a unifying framework for studying confidence across biological and artificial intelligence.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Jul 2026.
Builds on
9 of 24 references.
References · 9
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
- 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,783
- 2016CLEVR: A Diagnostic Dataset for Compositional Language and Elementary Visual Reasoningcited by 1,445
- 2023Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMscited by 946
- 2023Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedbackcited by 788
- 2025Metacognition and Uncertainty Communication in Humans and Large Language Modelscited by 23
- 2026How do LLMs Compute Verbal Confidencecited by 23
- 2026Causal Evidence that Language Models use Confidence to Drive Behaviorcited by 9
- 2026Reported Confidence in LLMs Tracks Commitment More Than Correctnesscited by 8
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Closing the Confidence-Faithfulness Gap in Large Language Models
- 2024Confidence in the Reasoning of Large Language Models
- 2026Quantifying Faithful Confidence Expression in Large Reasoning Models
- 2026Claim-Level Confidence Calibration for Reliable Decision Making with Large Language Models
- 2026CALIBER: Calibrating Confidence Before and After Reasoning in Language Models
- 2026Confidence Geometry Reveals Trace-Level Correctness in Large Language Model Reasoning
- 2026An Analysis of Training-Free Self-Reported Confidence in Language Models
- 2024Confidence Under the Hood: An Investigation into the Confidence-Probability Alignment in Large Language Models