Mapping Trustworthiness in Large Language Models: A Bibliometric Analysis Bridging Theory to Practice

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.04785v3
• Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 23:37:27 GMT
• Title: Mapping Trustworthiness in Large Language Models: A Bibliometric Analysis Bridging Theory to Practice
• Authors: José Siqueira de Cerqueira, Kai-Kristian Kemell, Rebekah Rousi, Nannan Xi, Juho Hamari, Pekka Abrahamsson,
• Abstract summary: This study aims to bridge the gap between theoretical discussion and practical implementation by analysing research trends, definitions of trustworthiness, and practical techniques.<n>We identified 18 different definitions of trust/trustworthiness, with transparency, explainability and reliability emerging as the most common dimensions.<n>We identified 20 strategies to enhance LLM trustworthiness, with fine-tuning and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) being the most prominent.
• Score: 11.251046343609078
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The rapid proliferation of Large Language Models (LLMs) has raised significant trustworthiness and ethical concerns. Despite the widespread adoption of LLMs across domains, there is still no clear consensus on how to define and operationalise trustworthiness. This study aims to bridge the gap between theoretical discussion and practical implementation by analysing research trends, definitions of trustworthiness, and practical techniques. We conducted a bibliometric mapping analysis of 2,006 publications from Web of Science (2019-2025) using the Bibliometrix, and manually reviewed 68 papers. We found a shift from traditional AI ethics discussion to LLM trustworthiness frameworks. We identified 18 different definitions of trust/trustworthiness, with transparency, explainability and reliability emerging as the most common dimensions. We identified 20 strategies to enhance LLM trustworthiness, with fine-tuning and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) being the most prominent. Most of the strategies are developer-driven and applied during the post-training phase. Several authors propose fragmented terminologies rather than unified frameworks, leading to the risks of "ethics washing," where ethical discourse is adopted without a genuine regulatory commitment. Our findings highlight: persistent gaps between theoretical taxonomies and practical implementation, the crucial role of the developer in operationalising trust, and call for standardised frameworks and stronger regulatory measures to enable trustworthy and ethical deployment of LLMs.

Related papers

• Mapping the Trust Terrain: LLMs in Software Engineering -- Insights and Perspectives [25.27634711529676]
  Applications of Large Language Models (LLMs) are rapidly growing in industry and academia for various software engineering (SE) tasks. As these models become more integral to critical processes, ensuring their reliability and trustworthiness becomes essential. The landscape of trust-related concepts in LLMs in SE is relatively unclear, with concepts such as trust, distrust, and trustworthiness lacking clear conceptualizations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-18T00:49:43Z)
• On the Trustworthiness of Generative Foundation Models: Guideline, Assessment, and Perspective [334.48358909967845]
  Generative Foundation Models (GenFMs) have emerged as transformative tools.<n>Their widespread adoption raises critical concerns regarding trustworthiness across dimensions.<n>This paper presents a comprehensive framework to address these challenges through three key contributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T06:20:36Z)
• Large Language Models Penetration in Scholarly Writing and Peer Review [43.600778691549706]
  We evaluate the penetration of Large Language Models across academic perspectives and dimensions.<n>Our experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of textttLLMetrica, revealing the increasing role of LLMs in scholarly processes.<n>These findings emphasize the need for transparency, accountability, and ethical practices in LLM usage to maintain academic credibility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-16T16:37:34Z)
• Towards More Trustworthy and Interpretable LLMs for Code through Syntax-Grounded Explanations [48.07182711678573]
  ASTrust generates explanations grounded in the relationship between model confidence and syntactic structures of programming languages. We develop an automated visualization that illustrates the aggregated model confidence scores superimposed on sequence, heat-map, and graph-based visuals of syntactic structures from ASTs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-12T04:38:28Z)
• TRACE: TRansformer-based Attribution using Contrastive Embeddings in LLMs [50.259001311894295]
  We propose a novel TRansformer-based Attribution framework using Contrastive Embeddings called TRACE. We show that TRACE significantly improves the ability to attribute sources accurately, making it a valuable tool for enhancing the reliability and trustworthiness of large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-06T07:19:30Z)
• On the Hardness of Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Large Language Models [25.029579061612456]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being employed in real-world applications in critical domains such as healthcare. It is important to ensure that the Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning generated by these models faithfully captures their underlying behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-15T13:16:44Z)
• MoralBench: Moral Evaluation of LLMs [34.43699121838648]
  This paper introduces a novel benchmark designed to measure and compare the moral reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs)<n>We present the first comprehensive dataset specifically curated to probe the moral dimensions of LLM outputs.<n>Our methodology involves a multi-faceted approach, combining quantitative analysis with qualitative insights from ethics scholars to ensure a thorough evaluation of model performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-06T18:15:01Z)
• TrustScore: Reference-Free Evaluation of LLM Response Trustworthiness [58.721012475577716]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities across various domains, prompting a surge in their practical applications. This paper introduces TrustScore, a framework based on the concept of Behavioral Consistency, which evaluates whether an LLMs response aligns with its intrinsic knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T21:12:14Z)
• Best Practices for Text Annotation with Large Language Models [11.421942894219901]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have ushered in a new era of text annotation. This paper proposes a comprehensive set of standards and best practices for their reliable, reproducible, and ethical use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-05T15:43:50Z)
• From Understanding to Utilization: A Survey on Explainability for Large Language Models [27.295767173801426]
  This survey underscores the imperative for increased explainability in Large Language Models (LLMs) Our focus is primarily on pre-trained Transformer-based LLMs, which pose distinctive interpretability challenges due to their scale and complexity. When considering the utilization of explainability, we explore several compelling methods that concentrate on model editing, control generation, and model enhancement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-23T16:09:53Z)
• TrustLLM: Trustworthiness in Large Language Models [446.5640421311468]
  This paper introduces TrustLLM, a comprehensive study of trustworthiness in large language models (LLMs) We first propose a set of principles for trustworthy LLMs that span eight different dimensions. Based on these principles, we establish a benchmark across six dimensions including truthfulness, safety, fairness, robustness, privacy, and machine ethics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-10T22:07:21Z)
• A Principled Framework for Knowledge-enhanced Large Language Model [58.1536118111993]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are versatile, yet they often falter in tasks requiring deep and reliable reasoning. This paper introduces a rigorously designed framework for creating LLMs that effectively anchor knowledge and employ a closed-loop reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-18T18:10:02Z)
• EpiK-Eval: Evaluation for Language Models as Epistemic Models [16.485951373967502]
  We introduce EpiK-Eval, a novel question-answering benchmark tailored to evaluate LLMs' proficiency in formulating a coherent and consistent knowledge representation from segmented narratives. We argue that these shortcomings stem from the intrinsic nature of prevailing training objectives. The findings from this study offer insights for developing more robust and reliable LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T21:15:54Z)
• 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)

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.