Enhancing Confidence Expression in Large Language Models Through Learning from Past Experience

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.10315v1
• Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 06:47:49 GMT
• Title: Enhancing Confidence Expression in Large Language Models Through Learning from Past Experience
• Authors: Haixia Han, Tingyun Li, Shisong Chen, Jie Shi, Chengyu Du, Yanghua Xiao, Jiaqing Liang, Xin Lin,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have exhibited remarkable performance across various downstream tasks. We propose a method of Learning from Past experience (LePe) to enhance the capability for confidence expression.
• Score: 41.06726400259579
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have exhibited remarkable performance across various downstream tasks, but they may generate inaccurate or false information with a confident tone. One of the possible solutions is to empower the LLM confidence expression capability, in which the confidence expressed can be well-aligned with the true probability of the generated answer being correct. However, leveraging the intrinsic ability of LLMs or the signals from the output logits of answers proves challenging in accurately capturing the response uncertainty in LLMs. Therefore, drawing inspiration from cognitive diagnostics, we propose a method of Learning from Past experience (LePe) to enhance the capability for confidence expression. Specifically, we first identify three key problems: (1) How to capture the inherent confidence of the LLM? (2) How to teach the LLM to express confidence? (3) How to evaluate the confidence expression of the LLM? Then we devise three stages in LePe to deal with these problems. Besides, to accurately capture the confidence of an LLM when constructing the training data, we design a complete pipeline including question preparation and answer sampling. We also conduct experiments using the Llama family of LLMs to verify the effectiveness of our proposed method on four datasets.

Related papers

• Learning to Route with Confidence Tokens [43.63392143501436]
  We study the extent to which large language models can reliably indicate confidence in their answers. We propose Self-REF, a lightweight training strategy to teach LLMs to express confidence in a reliable manner. Compared to conventional approaches such as verbalizing confidence and examining token probabilities, we demonstrate empirically that confidence tokens show significant improvements in downstream routing and rejection learning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T07:28:18Z)
• SaySelf: Teaching LLMs to Express Confidence with Self-Reflective Rationales [29.33581578047835]
  SaySelf is a training framework that teaches large language models to express more accurate fine-grained confidence estimates. In addition, SaySelf directs LLMs to produce self-reflective rationales that clearly identify gaps in their parametric knowledge. We show that the generated self-reflective rationales are reasonable and can further contribute to the calibration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-31T16:21:16Z)
• Fact-and-Reflection (FaR) Improves Confidence Calibration of Large Language Models [84.94220787791389]
  We propose Fact-and-Reflection (FaR) prompting, which improves the LLM calibration in two steps. Experiments show that FaR achieves significantly better calibration; it lowers the Expected Error by 23.5%. FaR even elicits the capability of verbally expressing concerns in less confident scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-27T01:37:23Z)
• The Calibration Gap between Model and Human Confidence in Large Language Models [14.539888672603743]
  Large language models (LLMs) need to be well-calibrated in the sense that they can accurately assess and communicate how likely it is that their predictions are correct. Recent work has focused on the quality of internal LLM confidence assessments. This paper explores the disparity between external human confidence in an LLM's responses and the internal confidence of the model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-24T22:21:04Z)
• Assessing the Reliability of Large Language Model Knowledge [78.38870272050106]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been treated as knowledge bases due to their strong performance in knowledge probing tasks. How do we evaluate the capabilities of LLMs to consistently produce factually correct answers? We propose MOdel kNowledge relIabiliTy scORe (MONITOR), a novel metric designed to directly measure LLMs' factual reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-15T12:40:30Z)
• Survey on Factuality in Large Language Models: Knowledge, Retrieval and Domain-Specificity [61.54815512469125]
  This survey addresses the crucial issue of factuality in Large Language Models (LLMs) As LLMs find applications across diverse domains, the reliability and accuracy of their outputs become vital.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T14:18:03Z)
• Improving Open Information Extraction with Large Language Models: A Study on Demonstration Uncertainty [52.72790059506241]
  Open Information Extraction (OIE) task aims at extracting structured facts from unstructured text. Despite the potential of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT as a general task solver, they lag behind state-of-the-art (supervised) methods in OIE tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-07T01:35:24Z)
• Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMs [60.61002524947733]
  Previous confidence elicitation methods rely on white-box access to internal model information or model fine-tuning. This leads to a growing need to explore the untapped area of black-box approaches for uncertainty estimation. We define a systematic framework with three components: prompting strategies for eliciting verbalized confidence, sampling methods for generating multiple responses, and aggregation techniques for computing consistency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-22T17:31:44Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.