Uncertainty Quantification for LLM-Based Survey Simulations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.17773v1
• Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 02:07:29 GMT
• Title: Uncertainty Quantification for LLM-Based Survey Simulations
• Authors: Chengpiao Huang, Yuhang Wu, Kaizheng Wang,
• Abstract summary: We investigate the reliable use of simulated survey responses from large language models (LLMs) through the lens of uncertainty quantification.<n>Our approach converts synthetic data into confidence sets for population parameters of human responses, addressing the distribution shift between the simulated and real populations.
• Score: 9.303339416902995
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: We investigate the reliable use of simulated survey responses from large language models (LLMs) through the lens of uncertainty quantification. Our approach converts synthetic data into confidence sets for population parameters of human responses, addressing the distribution shift between the simulated and real populations. A key innovation lies in determining the optimal number of simulated responses: too many produce overly narrow confidence sets with poor coverage, while too few yield excessively loose estimates. To resolve this, our method adaptively selects the simulation sample size, ensuring valid average-case coverage guarantees. It is broadly applicable to any LLM, irrespective of its fidelity, and any procedure for constructing confidence sets. Additionally, the selected sample size quantifies the degree of misalignment between the LLM and the target human population. We illustrate our method on real datasets and LLMs.

Related papers

• Graph-based Confidence Calibration for Large Language Models [22.394717844099684]
  We propose a novel method to develop a well-calibrated confidence estimation model. We use a weighted graph to represent the consistency among the large language models' responses to a question. We then train a graph neural network to estimate the probability of correct responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-03T20:36:44Z)
• Self-Evolutionary Large Language Models through Uncertainty-Enhanced Preference Optimization [9.618391485742968]
  Iterative preference optimization has recently become one of the de-facto training paradigms for large language models (LLMs) We present an uncertainty-enhanced textbfPreference textbfOptimization framework to make the LLM self-evolve with reliable feedback. Our framework substantially alleviates the noisy problem and improves the performance of iterative preference optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-17T14:05:58Z)
• 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)
• Regression-aware Inference with LLMs [52.764328080398805]
  We show that an inference strategy can be sub-optimal for common regression and scoring evaluation metrics. We propose alternate inference strategies that estimate the Bayes-optimal solution for regression and scoring metrics in closed-form from sampled responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-07T03:24:34Z)
• 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)
• Self-Evaluation Improves Selective Generation in Large Language Models [54.003992911447696]
  We reformulate open-ended generation tasks into token-level prediction tasks. We instruct an LLM to self-evaluate its answers. We benchmark a range of scoring methods based on self-evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-14T19:09:22Z)
• 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)
• ReEval: Automatic Hallucination Evaluation for Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models via Transferable Adversarial Attacks [91.55895047448249]
  This paper presents ReEval, an LLM-based framework using prompt chaining to perturb the original evidence for generating new test cases. We implement ReEval using ChatGPT and evaluate the resulting variants of two popular open-domain QA datasets. Our generated data is human-readable and useful to trigger hallucination in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-19T06:37:32Z)
• Quantifying Uncertainty in Answers from any Language Model and Enhancing their Trustworthiness [16.35655151252159]
  We introduce BSDetector, a method for detecting bad and speculative answers from a pretrained Large Language Model. Our uncertainty quantification technique works for any LLM accessible only via a black-box API.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-30T17:53:25Z)
• Pareto Optimal Learning for Estimating Large Language Model Errors [12.21899680905672]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive abilities in many applications. We present a method that generates a risk score to estimate the probability of error in an LLM response by integrating multiple sources of information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-28T21:11:15Z)
• Let's Sample Step by Step: Adaptive-Consistency for Efficient Reasoning and Coding with LLMs [60.58434523646137]
  A popular approach for improving the correctness of output from large language models (LLMs) is Self-Consistency. We introduce Adaptive-Consistency, a cost-efficient, model-agnostic technique that dynamically adjusts the number of samples per question. Our experiments show that Adaptive-Consistency reduces sample budget by up to 7.9 times with an average accuracy drop of less than 0.1%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-19T17:49:25Z)

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.