Attention-Path Fragility as an Uncertainty Signal in Large Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We propose that a model's uncertainty about a token is reflected not only in the breadth of its output distribution but also in whether a confident prediction is fragile under perturbation of its attention pathways. We instantiate this as ASMI (Attention-Subnetwork Mutual Information), a training-free estimator that masks attention heads and measures the BALD mutual information among the resulting subnetworks, with a semantic-agreement kernel to discount surface-form disagreement. The signal is not a restatement of output confidence: on grounded QA an out-of-fold test shows it adds error-predictive information beyond single-pass confidence and entropy, concentrated in confident-but-fragile predictions, where acting on it roughly halves the retained error of a confidence filter. The distinctness is regime-graded, so ASMI predicts its own domain of applicability, strong where answers are routed through provided context and bounded by design where they are recalled from parametric knowledge. Sem-ASMI reads the signal from a single greedy response, without the stochastic generations the strongest baselines require, and ties or beats Semantic Entropy on ten of the twelve grounded benchmark-backbone settings. Across the same twelve settings, the best ASMI variant, typically the adaptive one reusing the ten samples already drawn for the baselines, ties or leads the strongest baseline in eight, significantly in three under a paired test. On parametric QA all variants revert to or below the zero-cost MSP baseline, exactly as predicted, and the estimates are near-deterministic across reruns. A head-level analysis shows that what tracks this boundary is not the presence of head-level fragility but whether that fragility couples to errors.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 40 of its 56 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Aug 2026.
Builds on
40 of 56 references.
References · 40
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,448
- 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
- 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,955
- 2022Locating and Editing Factual Associations in GPTcited by 2,691
- 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,856
- 2020Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Are Key-Value Memoriescited by 1,336
- 2022When Not to Trust Language Models: Investigating Effectiveness of Parametric and Non-Parametric Memoriescited by 1,128
- 2022In-context Learning and Induction Headscited by 964
- 2020On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 900
- 2019Analyzing Multi-Head Self-Attention: Specialized Heads Do the Heavy Lifting, the Rest Can Be Prunedcited by 856
28 more
- 2017Selective Classification for Deep Neural Networkscited by 852
- 2019Are Sixteen Heads Really Better than One?cited by 816
- 2018CoQA: A Conversational Question Answering Challengecited by 683
- 2023Dissecting Recall of Factual Associations in Auto-Regressive Language Modelscited by 528
- 2021Entity-Based Knowledge Conflicts in Question Answeringcited by 356
- 2024INSIDE: LLMs' Internal States Retain the Power of Hallucination Detectioncited by 323
- 2015Towards AI-Complete Question Answering: A Set of Prerequisite Toy Taskscited by 314
- 2023AlignScore: Evaluating Factual Consistency with a Unified Alignment Functioncited by 288
- 2024Knowledge Conflicts for LLMs: A Surveycited by 283
- 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
- 2020Selective Question Answering under Domain Shiftcited by 238
- 2024Retrieval Head Mechanistically Explains Long-Context Factualitycited by 232
- 2025Scalable Best-of-N Selection for Large Language Models via Self-Certaintycited by 187
- 2018Understanding Measures of Uncertainty for Adversarial Example Detectioncited by 177
- 2024Kernel Language Entropy: Fine-grained Uncertainty Quantification for LLMs from Semantic Similaritiescited by 159
- 2024Lookback Lens: Detecting and Mitigating Contextual Hallucinations in Large Language Models Using Only Attention Mapscited by 142
- 2023LM-Polygraph: Uncertainty Estimation for Language Modelscited by 131
- 2022Quantifying Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty in Machine Learning: Are Conditional Entropy and Mutual Information Appropriate Measures?cited by 125
- 2024Benchmarking Uncertainty Quantification Methods for Large Language Models with LM-Polygraphcited by 105
- 2024ReDeEP: Detecting Hallucination in Retrieval-Augmented Generation via Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 101
- 2024Cutting Off the Head Ends the Conflict: A Mechanism for Interpreting and Mitigating Knowledge Conflicts in Language Modelscited by 91
- 2024What Matters in Transformers? Not All Attention is Neededcited by 84
- 2024On the Role of Attention Heads in Large Language Model Safetycited by 72
- 2023Attention Satisfies: A Constraint-Satisfaction Lens on Factual Errors of Language Modelscited by 67
- 2023From Language Modeling to Instruction Following: Understanding the Behavior Shift in LLMs after Instruction Tuningcited by 56
- 2023Characterizing Mechanisms for Factual Recall in Language Modelscited by 48
- 2024Competition of Mechanisms: Tracing How Language Models Handle Facts and Counterfactualscited by 40
Built on by
Not cited yet.