Enhancing LLM Reliability via Explicit Knowledge Boundary Modeling

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.02233v2
• Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 07:42:04 GMT
• Title: Enhancing LLM Reliability via Explicit Knowledge Boundary Modeling
• Authors: Hang Zheng, Hongshen Xu, Yuncong Liu, Lu Chen, Pascale Fung, Kai Yu,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) frequently hallucinate due to misaligned self-awareness.<n>Existing approaches mitigate hallucinations via uncertainty estimation or query rejection.<n>We propose the Explicit Knowledge Boundary Modeling framework to integrate fast and slow reasoning systems.
• Score: 48.15636223774418
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) frequently hallucinate due to misaligned self-awareness, generating erroneous outputs when addressing queries beyond their knowledge boundaries. While existing approaches mitigate hallucinations via uncertainty estimation or query rejection, they suffer from computational inefficiency or sacrificed helpfulness. To address these issues, we propose the Explicit Knowledge Boundary Modeling (EKBM) framework, integrating fast and slow reasoning systems to harmonize reliability and usability. The framework first employs a fast-thinking model to generate confidence-labeled responses, enabling immediate use of high-confidence outputs. For uncertain predictions, a slow refinement model conducts targeted reasoning to improve accuracy. To align model behavior with our proposed object, we propose a hybrid training pipeline, enhancing self-awareness without degrading task performance. Evaluations on dialogue state tracking tasks demonstrate that EKBM achieves superior model reliability over uncertainty-based baselines. Further analysis reveals that refinement substantially boosts accuracy while maintaining low computational overhead. Our work establishes a scalable paradigm for advancing LLM reliability and balancing accuracy and practical utility in error-sensitive applications.

Related papers

• Towards Robust LLMs: an Adversarial Robustness Measurement Framework [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) remain vulnerable to adversarial perturbations, undermining their reliability in high-stakes applications. We adapt the Robustness Measurement and Assessment framework to quantify LLM resilience against adversarial inputs without requiring access to model parameters. Our work provides a systematic methodology to assess LLM robustness, advancing the development of more reliable language models for real-world deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-24T16:36:19Z)
• Enhancing Trust in Large Language Models with Uncertainty-Aware Fine-Tuning [10.457661605916435]
  Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized the field of natural language processing with their impressive reasoning and question-answering capabilities.<n>LLMs are sometimes prone to generating credible-sounding but incorrect information, a phenomenon known as hallucinations.<n>We introduce a novel uncertainty-aware causal language modeling loss function, grounded in the principles of decision theory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-03T23:14:47Z)
• Self-Improvement in Language Models: The Sharpening Mechanism [70.9248553790022]
  We offer a new perspective on the capabilities of self-improvement through a lens we refer to as sharpening. Motivated by the observation that language models are often better at verifying response quality than they are at generating correct responses, we formalize self-improvement as using the model itself as a verifier during post-training. We analyze two natural families of self-improvement algorithms based on SFT and RLHF.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-02T20:24:17Z)
• FastRM: An efficient and automatic explainability framework for multimodal generative models [10.184567639685321]
  FastRM is an efficient method for predicting explainable Relevancy Maps of LVLMs.<n>FastRM achieves a 99.8% reduction in computation time and a 44.4% reduction in memory footprint.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-02T13:39:29Z)
• Know Where You're Uncertain When Planning with Multimodal Foundation Models: A Formal Framework [54.40508478482667]
  We present a comprehensive framework to disentangle, quantify, and mitigate uncertainty in perception and plan generation. We propose methods tailored to the unique properties of perception and decision-making. We show that our uncertainty disentanglement framework reduces variability by up to 40% and enhances task success rates by 5% compared to baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-03T17:32:00Z)
• Confidence Estimation for LLM-Based Dialogue State Tracking [9.305763502526833]
  Estimation of a model's confidence on its outputs is critical for Conversational AI systems based on large language models (LLMs) We provide an exhaustive exploration of methods, including approaches proposed for open- and closed-weight LLMs. Our findings suggest that fine-tuning open-weight LLMs can result in enhanced AUC performance, indicating better confidence score calibration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-15T06:44:26Z)
• Test-Time Fairness and Robustness in Large Language Models [17.758735680493917]
  Frontier Large Language Models (LLMs) can be socially discriminatory or sensitive to spurious features of their inputs. Existing solutions, which instruct the LLM to be fair or robust, rely on the model's implicit understanding of bias. We show that our prompting strategy, unlike implicit instructions, consistently reduces the bias of frontier LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-11T20:05:15Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• QualEval: Qualitative Evaluation for Model Improvement [82.73561470966658]
  We propose QualEval, which augments quantitative scalar metrics with automated qualitative evaluation as a vehicle for model improvement. QualEval uses a powerful LLM reasoner and our novel flexible linear programming solver to generate human-readable insights. We demonstrate that leveraging its insights, for example, improves the absolute performance of the Llama 2 model by up to 15% points relative.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-06T00:21:44Z)
• 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)
• PACE-LM: Prompting and Augmentation for Calibrated Confidence Estimation with GPT-4 in Cloud Incident Root Cause Analysis [17.362895895214344]
  Large language models (LLMs) are used to help humans identify the root causes of cloud incidents. We propose to perform confidence estimation for the predictions to help on-call engineers make decisions on whether to adopt the model prediction. We show that our method is able to produce calibrated confidence estimates for predicted root causes, validate the usefulness of retrieved historical data and the prompting strategy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-11T21:24:00Z)

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.