On the Intrinsic Self-Correction Capability of LLMs: Uncertainty and Latent Concept

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.02378v1
• Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 14:55:43 GMT
• Title: On the Intrinsic Self-Correction Capability of LLMs: Uncertainty and Latent Concept
• Authors: Guangliang Liu, Haitao Mao, Bochuan Cao, Zhiyu Xue, Kristen Johnson, Jiliang Tang, Rongrong Wang,
• Abstract summary: We show that appropriate instructions can guide Large Language Models to a convergence state, wherein additional self-correction steps do not yield further performance improvements. We provide a mathematical formulation indicating that the activated latent concept drives the convergence of the model uncertainty and self-correction performance.
• Score: 34.51532840859617
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) can improve their responses when instructed to do so, a capability known as self-correction. When these instructions lack specific details about the issues in the response, this is referred to as leveraging the intrinsic self-correction capability. The empirical success of self-correction can be found in various applications, e.g., text detoxification and social bias mitigation. However, leveraging this self-correction capability may not always be effective, as it has the potential to revise an initially correct response into an incorrect one. In this paper, we endeavor to understand how and why leveraging the self-correction capability is effective. We identify that appropriate instructions can guide LLMs to a convergence state, wherein additional self-correction steps do not yield further performance improvements. We empirically demonstrate that model uncertainty and activated latent concepts jointly characterize the effectiveness of self-correction. Furthermore, we provide a mathematical formulation indicating that the activated latent concept drives the convergence of the model uncertainty and self-correction performance. Our analysis can also be generalized to the self-correction behaviors observed in Vision-Language Models (VLMs). Moreover, we highlight that task-agnostic debiasing can benefit from our principle in terms of selecting effective fine-tuning samples. Such initial success demonstrates the potential extensibility for better instruction tuning and safety alignment.

Related papers

• Discourse Heuristics For Paradoxically Moral Self-Correction [6.360181137608509]
  Moral self-correction has emerged as a promising approach for aligning the output of Large Language Models with human moral values.<n>We show that moral self-correction relies on discourse constructions that reflect shortcuts.<n>We propose a solution to improve moral self-correction by leveraging the generalizations of curated datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-01T17:36:41Z)
• Language Models can perform Single-Utterance Self-Correction of Perturbed Reasoning [4.768151813962547]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive mathematical reasoning capabilities.<n>Their performance remains brittle to minor variations in problem description and prompting strategy.<n>To better understand self-correction capabilities of recent models, we conduct experiments measuring models' ability to self-correct synthetics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-18T21:35:44Z)
• Can Large Reasoning Models Self-Train? [58.953117118687096]
  Scaling the performance of large language models increasingly depends on methods that reduce reliance on human supervision.<n>We propose an online self-training reinforcement learning algorithm that leverages the model's self-consistency to infer correctness signals and train without any ground-truth supervision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T17:16:00Z)
• Trust, But Verify: A Self-Verification Approach to Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards [67.86091419220816]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) show great promise in complex reasoning.<n>A prevalent issue is superficial self-reflection'', where models fail to robustly verify their own outputs.<n>We introduce RISE (Reinforcing Reasoning with Self-Verification), a novel online RL framework designed to tackle this.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T17:59:31Z)
• Enhancing LLM Reliability via Explicit Knowledge Boundary Modeling [48.15636223774418]
  Large language models (LLMs) frequently hallucinate due to misaligned self-awareness. Existing approaches mitigate hallucinations via uncertainty estimation or query rejection. We propose the Explicit Knowledge Boundary Modeling framework to integrate fast and slow reasoning systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-04T03:16:02Z)
• Self-rewarding correction for mathematical reasoning [19.480508580498103]
  We study self-rewarding reasoning large language models (LLMs) LLMs can simultaneously generate step-by-step reasoning and evaluate the correctness of their outputs during the inference time-without external feedback. We propose a two-staged algorithmic framework for constructing self-rewarding reasoning models using only self-generated data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-26T23:01:16Z)
• ReVISE: Learning to Refine at Test-Time via Intrinsic Self-Verification [53.80183105328448]
  Refine via Intrinsic Self-Verification (ReVISE) is an efficient framework that enables LLMs to self-correct their outputs through self-verification. Our experiments on various reasoning tasks demonstrate that ReVISE achieves efficient self-correction and significantly improves reasoning performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T13:50:02Z)
• Bridging Internal Probability and Self-Consistency for Effective and Efficient LLM Reasoning [53.25336975467293]
  We present the first theoretical error decomposition analysis of methods such as perplexity and self-consistency. Our analysis reveals a fundamental trade-off: perplexity methods suffer from substantial model error due to the absence of a proper consistency function. We propose Reasoning-Pruning Perplexity Consistency (RPC), which integrates perplexity with self-consistency, and Reasoning Pruning, which eliminates low-probability reasoning paths.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-01T18:09:49Z)
• Confidence v.s. Critique: A Decomposition of Self-Correction Capability for LLMs [34.203575667558454]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) can correct their self-generated responses, but a decline in accuracy after self-correction is also witnessed. We decompose the self-correction capability into confidence (being confident to correct answers) and critique (turning wrong answers to correct) capabilities. Our strategy outperforms vanilla SFT in both capabilities and achieves much higher accuracy after self-correction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-27T08:09:11Z)
• Is Moral Self-correction An Innate Capability of Large Language Models? A Mechanistic Analysis to Self-correction [5.271054803267951]
  We aim to answer two fundamental questions for moral self-correction. We examine how different self-correction components interact to intervene the embedded morality within hidden states. We propose a validation framework, self-distinguish, that requires effective self-correction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-27T16:52:21Z)
• Self-Correction is More than Refinement: A Learning Framework for Visual and Language Reasoning Tasks [43.96835245022083]
  Self-correction that instructs models to refine their outputs presents a promising solution to this issue. This study investigates the self-correction capabilities of Vision-Language Models during both inference and fine-tuning stages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T06:28:54Z)
• Training Language Models to Self-Correct via Reinforcement Learning [98.35197671595343]
  Self-correction has been found to be largely ineffective in modern large language models (LLMs) We develop a multi-turn online reinforcement learning approach, SCoRe, that significantly improves an LLM's self-correction ability using entirely self-generated data. We find that SCoRe achieves state-of-the-art self-correction performance, improving the base models' self-correction by 15.6% and 9.1% respectively on MATH and HumanEval.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-19T17:16:21Z)
• Large Language Models have Intrinsic Self-Correction Ability [16.831123666582755]
  Large language models suffer from hallucinations that will cause performance degradation. One promising solution to improve the LLMs' performance is to ask LLMs to revise their answer after generation. In intrinsic self-correction is considered a promising direction because it does not utilize external knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-21T22:29:40Z)
• Confidence Matters: Revisiting Intrinsic Self-Correction Capabilities of Large Language Models [23.42725642076256]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have catalyzed an increasing interest in their self-correction capabilities. This paper presents a comprehensive investigation into the intrinsic self-correction of LLMs. We develop an "If-or-Else" (IoE) prompting framework, designed to guide LLMs in assessing their own "confidence"
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T21:38:02Z)
• Self-Alignment for Factuality: Mitigating Hallucinations in LLMs via Self-Evaluation [71.91287418249688]
  Large language models (LLMs) often struggle with factual inaccuracies, even when they hold relevant knowledge. We leverage the self-evaluation capability of an LLM to provide training signals that steer the model towards factuality. We show that the proposed self-alignment approach substantially enhances factual accuracy over Llama family models across three key knowledge-intensive tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-14T15:52:42Z)
• N-Critics: Self-Refinement of Large Language Models with Ensemble of Critics [5.516095889257118]
  We propose a self-correction mechanism for Large Language Models (LLMs) to mitigate issues such as toxicity and fact hallucination. This method involves refining model outputs through an ensemble of critics and the model's own feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-28T11:22:22Z)
• Improving the Reliability of Large Language Models by Leveraging Uncertainty-Aware In-Context Learning [76.98542249776257]
  Large-scale language models often face the challenge of "hallucination" We introduce an uncertainty-aware in-context learning framework to empower the model to enhance or reject its output in response to uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-07T12:06:53Z)
• Large Language Models Cannot Self-Correct Reasoning Yet [78.16697476530994]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as a groundbreaking technology with their unparalleled text generation capabilities. Concerns persist regarding the accuracy and appropriateness of their generated content. A contemporary methodology, self-correction, has been proposed as a remedy to these issues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-03T04:56:12Z)
• Robustness and Accuracy Could Be Reconcilable by (Proper) Definition [109.62614226793833]
  The trade-off between robustness and accuracy has been widely studied in the adversarial literature. We find that it may stem from the improperly defined robust error, which imposes an inductive bias of local invariance. By definition, SCORE facilitates the reconciliation between robustness and accuracy, while still handling the worst-case uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-21T10:36:09Z)

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.