mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

SupportCal: Label-Free Calibration of Post-Trained LLMs via Reference Support and Corroboration

arXiv 2609.24303 ↗First posted 21 Sep 2026cs.LG cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Post-training often improves task performance but can degrade confidence calibration, leaving post-trained language models (PoLMs) more overconfident than their corresponding pretrained language models (PLMs). Because task-specific labeled calibration data can be costly or unavailable, the corresponding PLM provides a natural label-free reference for post-hoc calibration. Prior agreement-gated PLM-referenced calibration fits a scalar temperature using only examples on which the PoLM and its PLM reference agree, excluding disagreement examples because direct alignment can drive the fitted temperature excessively high and induce under-confidence. We revisit this binary treatment. A controlled reintroduction diagnostic reveals a non monotonic aggregate effect: admitting a moderate fraction of disagreement examples can improve calibration, whereas the benefit diminishes as unit weight inclusion approaches the full disagreement set. We introduce SupportCal, a label-free post-hoc method that retains agreement examples at unit weight and assigns disagreement examples continuous weights based on the own-base PLM's relative support and corroboration from pretrained references selected from a size-compatible candidate pool. We further characterize when the resulting weighted objective admits a finite optimal temperature. Across MedMCQA and MathQA, SupportCal yields lower mean ECE than the agreement-only baseline for nearly all evaluated target-model configurations; supplementary TweetEval Sentiment results show the same pattern on a fixed-label classification task.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Sep 2026.

Builds on

23 of 27 references.

References · 23

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  2. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  3. 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
  4. 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
  5. 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,164
  6. 2022Language Models (Mostly) Know What They Knowcited by 1,856
  7. 2025Gemma 3 Technical Reportcited by 1,824
  8. 2024DeepSeek-V2: A Strong, Economical, and Efficient Mixture-of-Experts Language Modelcited by 1,135
  9. 2024Qwen2.5-Math Technical Report: Toward Mathematical Expert Model via Self-Improvementcited by 1,090
  10. 2023Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMscited by 974
  11. 2023Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generationcited by 819
  12. 2023Just Ask for Calibration: Strategies for Eliciting Calibrated Confidence Scores from Language Models Fine-Tuned with Human Feedbackcited by 812
11 more
  1. 2022Teaching Models to Express Their Uncertainty in Wordscited by 751
  2. 2024Yi: Open Foundation Models by 01.AIcited by 719
  3. 2019MathQA: Towards Interpretable Math Word Problem Solving with Operation-Based Formalismscited by 662
  4. 2022MedMCQA : A Large-scale Multi-Subject Multi-Choice Dataset for Medical domain Question Answeringcited by 543
  5. 2020TweetEval: Unified Benchmark and Comparative Evaluation for Tweet Classificationcited by 417
  6. 2020Calibration of Pre-trained Transformerscited by 315
  7. 2023A Survey of Confidence Estimation and Calibration in Large Language Modelscited by 256
  8. 2024SaySelf: Teaching LLMs to Express Confidence with Self-Reflective Rationalescited by 105
  9. 2025Your Pre-trained LLM is Secretly an Unsupervised Confidence Calibratorcited by 20
  10. 2026BaseCal: Unsupervised Confidence Calibration via Base Model Signalscited by 8
  11. 2026CaliDist: Calibrating Large Language Models via Behavioral Robustness to Distractioncited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.