CLUE: Concept-Level Uncertainty Estimation for Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.03021v1
• Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2024 18:27:12 GMT
• Title: CLUE: Concept-Level Uncertainty Estimation for Large Language Models
• Authors: Yu-Hsiang Wang, Andrew Bai, Che-Ping Tsai, Cho-Jui Hsieh,
• Abstract summary: We propose a novel framework for Concept-Level Uncertainty Estimation for Large Language Models (LLMs) We leverage LLMs to convert output sequences into concept-level representations, breaking down sequences into individual concepts and measuring the uncertainty of each concept separately. We conduct experiments to demonstrate that CLUE can provide more interpretable uncertainty estimation results compared with sentence-level uncertainty.
• Score: 49.92690111618016
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable proficiency in various natural language generation (NLG) tasks. Previous studies suggest that LLMs' generation process involves uncertainty. However, existing approaches to uncertainty estimation mainly focus on sequence-level uncertainty, overlooking individual pieces of information within sequences. These methods fall short in separately assessing the uncertainty of each component in a sequence. In response, we propose a novel framework for Concept-Level Uncertainty Estimation (CLUE) for LLMs. We leverage LLMs to convert output sequences into concept-level representations, breaking down sequences into individual concepts and measuring the uncertainty of each concept separately. We conduct experiments to demonstrate that CLUE can provide more interpretable uncertainty estimation results compared with sentence-level uncertainty, and could be a useful tool for various tasks such as hallucination detection and story generation.

Related papers

• Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations [53.15438489398938]
  Large language models (LLMs) can reach and even surpass human-level accuracy on a variety of benchmarks, but their overconfidence in incorrect responses is still a well-documented failure mode. We propose a framework for measuring an LLM's uncertainty with respect to the distribution of generated explanations for an answer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T16:35:30Z)
• Kernel Language Entropy: Fine-grained Uncertainty Quantification for LLMs from Semantic Similarities [79.9629927171974]
  Uncertainty in Large Language Models (LLMs) is crucial for applications where safety and reliability are important. We propose Kernel Language Entropy (KLE), a novel method for uncertainty estimation in white- and black-box LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-30T12:42:05Z)
• Semantic Density: Uncertainty Quantification for Large Language Models through Confidence Measurement in Semantic Space [14.715989394285238]
  Existing Large Language Models (LLMs) do not have an inherent functionality to provide the users with an uncertainty/confidence metric for each response it generates. A new framework is proposed in this paper to address these issues. Semantic density extracts uncertainty/confidence information for each response from a probability distribution perspective in semantic space.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-22T17:13:49Z)
• Language Model Cascades: Token-level uncertainty and beyond [65.38515344964647]
  Recent advances in language models (LMs) have led to significant improvements in quality on complex NLP tasks. Cascading offers a simple strategy to achieve more favorable cost-quality tradeoffs. We show that incorporating token-level uncertainty through learned post-hoc deferral rules can significantly outperform simple aggregation strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-15T21:02:48Z)
• SPUQ: Perturbation-Based Uncertainty Quantification for Large Language Models [9.817185255633758]
  Large language models (LLMs) have become increasingly prevalent, offering remarkable text generation capabilities. A pressing challenge is their tendency to make confidently wrong predictions. We introduce a novel UQ method, sampling with perturbation for UQ (SPUQ), designed to tackle both aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties. Our findings show a substantial improvement in model calibration, with a reduction in Expected Error (ECE) by 50% on average.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-04T21:55:22Z)
• Uncertainty Quantification for In-Context Learning of Large Language Models [52.891205009620364]
  In-context learning has emerged as a groundbreaking ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) We propose a novel formulation and corresponding estimation method to quantify both types of uncertainties. The proposed method offers an unsupervised way to understand the prediction of in-context learning in a plug-and-play fashion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-15T18:46:24Z)
• Decomposing Uncertainty for Large Language Models through Input Clarification Ensembling [69.83976050879318]
  In large language models (LLMs), identifying sources of uncertainty is an important step toward improving reliability, trustworthiness, and interpretability. In this paper, we introduce an uncertainty decomposition framework for LLMs, called input clarification ensembling. Our approach generates a set of clarifications for the input, feeds them into an LLM, and ensembles the corresponding predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T05:58:35Z)
• Quantifying Uncertainty in Natural Language Explanations of Large Language Models [29.34960984639281]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used as powerful tools for high-stakes natural language processing (NLP) applications. We propose two novel metrics -- $textitVerbalized Uncertainty$ and $textitProbing Uncertainty$ -- to quantify the uncertainty of generated explanations. Our empirical analysis of benchmark datasets reveals that verbalized uncertainty is not a reliable estimate of explanation confidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-06T21:14:40Z)

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.