Line of Duty: Evaluating LLM Self-Knowledge via Consistency in Feasibility Boundaries

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.11256v1
• Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 10:07:07 GMT
• Title: Line of Duty: Evaluating LLM Self-Knowledge via Consistency in Feasibility Boundaries
• Authors: Sahil Kale, Vijaykant Nadadur,
• Abstract summary: This study aims to obtain intrinsic insights into different types of LLM self-knowledge with a novel methodology.<n>We find that even frontier models like GPT-4o and Mistral Large are not sure of their own capabilities more than 80% of the time.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: As LLMs grow more powerful, their most profound achievement may be recognising when to say "I don't know". Existing studies on LLM self-knowledge have been largely constrained by human-defined notions of feasibility, often neglecting the reasons behind unanswerability by LLMs and failing to study deficient types of self-knowledge. This study aims to obtain intrinsic insights into different types of LLM self-knowledge with a novel methodology: allowing them the flexibility to set their own feasibility boundaries and then analysing the consistency of these limits. We find that even frontier models like GPT-4o and Mistral Large are not sure of their own capabilities more than 80% of the time, highlighting a significant lack of trustworthiness in responses. Our analysis of confidence balance in LLMs indicates that models swing between overconfidence and conservatism in feasibility boundaries depending on task categories and that the most significant self-knowledge weaknesses lie in temporal awareness and contextual understanding. These difficulties in contextual comprehension additionally lead models to question their operational boundaries, resulting in considerable confusion within the self-knowledge of LLMs. We make our code and results available publicly at https://github.com/knowledge-verse-ai/LLM-Self_Knowledge_Eval

Related papers

• UAlign: Leveraging Uncertainty Estimations for Factuality Alignment on Large Language Models [41.67393607081513]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) often struggle to accurately express the factual knowledge they possess. We propose the UAlign framework, which leverages Uncertainty estimations to represent knowledge boundaries. We show that the proposed UAlign can significantly enhance the LLMs' capacities to confidently answer known questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-16T14:14:27Z)
• To Know or Not To Know? Analyzing Self-Consistency of Large Language Models under Ambiguity [27.10502683001428]
  This paper focuses on entity type ambiguity, analyzing the proficiency and consistency of state-of-the-art LLMs in applying factual knowledge when prompted with ambiguous entities. Experiments reveal that LLMs struggle with choosing the correct entity reading, achieving an average accuracy of only 85%, and as low as 75% with underspecified prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-24T09:48:48Z)
• When Do LLMs Need Retrieval Augmentation? Mitigating LLMs' Overconfidence Helps Retrieval Augmentation [66.01754585188739]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have been found to have difficulty knowing they do not possess certain knowledge. Retrieval Augmentation (RA) has been extensively studied to mitigate LLMs' hallucinations. We propose several methods to enhance LLMs' perception of knowledge boundaries and show that they are effective in reducing overconfidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T04:57:19Z)
• 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)
• Don't Hallucinate, Abstain: Identifying LLM Knowledge Gaps via Multi-LLM Collaboration [39.603649838876294]
  We study approaches to identify LLM knowledge gaps and abstain from answering questions when knowledge gaps are present. Motivated by their failures in self-reflection and over-reliance on held-out sets, we propose two novel approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-01T06:11:49Z)
• Examining LLMs' Uncertainty Expression Towards Questions Outside Parametric Knowledge [35.067234242461545]
  Large language models (LLMs) express uncertainty in situations where they lack sufficient parametric knowledge to generate reasonable responses. This work aims to systematically investigate LLMs' behaviors in such situations, emphasizing the trade-off between honesty and helpfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T10:02:40Z)
• RECALL: A Benchmark for LLMs Robustness against External Counterfactual Knowledge [69.79676144482792]
  This study aims to evaluate the ability of LLMs to distinguish reliable information from external knowledge. Our benchmark consists of two tasks, Question Answering and Text Generation, and for each task, we provide models with a context containing counterfactual information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-14T13:24:19Z)
• Survey on Factuality in Large Language Models: Knowledge, Retrieval and Domain-Specificity [61.54815512469125]
  This survey addresses the crucial issue of factuality in Large Language Models (LLMs) As LLMs find applications across diverse domains, the reliability and accuracy of their outputs become vital.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T14:18:03Z)
• Investigating the Factual Knowledge Boundary of Large Language Models with Retrieval Augmentation [109.8527403904657]
  We show that large language models (LLMs) possess unwavering confidence in their knowledge and cannot handle the conflict between internal and external knowledge well. Retrieval augmentation proves to be an effective approach in enhancing LLMs' awareness of knowledge boundaries. We propose a simple method to dynamically utilize supporting documents with our judgement strategy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T16:46:10Z)
• Do Large Language Models Know What They Don't Know? [74.65014158544011]
  Large language models (LLMs) have a wealth of knowledge that allows them to excel in various Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks. Despite their vast knowledge, LLMs are still limited by the amount of information they can accommodate and comprehend. This study aims to evaluate LLMs' self-knowledge by assessing their ability to identify unanswerable or unknowable questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-29T15:30:13Z)

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.