Self-Critique-Guided Curiosity Refinement: Enhancing Honesty and Helpfulness in Large Language Models via In-Context Learning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.16064v1
• Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 06:42:35 GMT
• Title: Self-Critique-Guided Curiosity Refinement: Enhancing Honesty and Helpfulness in Large Language Models via In-Context Learning
• Authors: Duc Hieu Ho, Chenglin Fan,
• Abstract summary: This paper conducts a benchmark evaluation of ten widely used large language models.<n>It proposes a novel prompting strategy, self-critique-guided curiosity refinement prompting.<n>The proposed method extends the curiosity-driven prompting strategy by incorporating two lightweight in-context steps.
• Score: 3.6042771517920724
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated robust capabilities across various natural language tasks. However, producing outputs that are consistently honest and helpful remains an open challenge. To overcome this challenge, this paper tackles the problem through two complementary directions. It conducts a comprehensive benchmark evaluation of ten widely used large language models, including both proprietary and open-weight models from OpenAI, Meta, and Google. In parallel, it proposes a novel prompting strategy, self-critique-guided curiosity refinement prompting. The key idea behind this strategy is enabling models to self-critique and refine their responses without additional training. The proposed method extends the curiosity-driven prompting strategy by incorporating two lightweight in-context steps including self-critique step and refinement step. The experiment results on the HONESET dataset evaluated using the framework $\mathrm{H}^2$ (honesty and helpfulness), which was executed with GPT-4o as a judge of honesty and helpfulness, show consistent improvements across all models. The approach reduces the number of poor-quality responses, increases high-quality responses, and achieves relative gains in $\mathrm{H}^2$ scores ranging from 1.4% to 4.3% compared to curiosity-driven prompting across evaluated models. These results highlight the effectiveness of structured self-refinement as a scalable and training-free strategy to improve the trustworthiness of LLMs outputs.

Related papers

• Critique-GRPO: Advancing LLM Reasoning with Natural Language and Numerical Feedback [59.078756231841574]
  Critique-GRPO integrates both natural language and numerical feedback for effective policy optimization.<n>It consistently outperforms supervised learning-based and RL-based fine-tuning approaches.<n>It surpasses a strong baseline that incorporates expert demonstrations within online reinforcement learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-03T17:39:02Z)
• Dancing with Critiques: Enhancing LLM Reasoning with Stepwise Natural Language Self-Critique [66.94905631175209]
  We propose a novel inference-time scaling approach -- stepwise natural language self-critique (PANEL)<n>It employs self-generated natural language critiques as feedback to guide the step-level search process.<n>This approach bypasses the need for task-specific verifiers and the associated training overhead.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-21T17:59:55Z)
• Self-Evolving Critique Abilities in Large Language Models [59.861013614500024]
  This paper explores enhancing critique abilities of Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We introduce SCRIT, a framework that trains LLMs with self-generated data to evolve their critique abilities.<n>Our analysis reveals that SCRIT's performance scales positively with data and model size.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-10T05:51:52Z)
• On the Adversarial Robustness of Instruction-Tuned Large Language Models for Code [4.286327408435937]
  We assess the impact of diverse input challenges on the functionality and correctness of generated code using rigorous metrics and established benchmarks.<n>Open-source models demonstrate an increased susceptibility to input perturbations, resulting in declines in functional correctness ranging from 12% to 34%.<n>In contrast, commercial models demonstrate relatively greater resilience, with performance degradation ranging from 3% to 24%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-29T07:00:47Z)
• Automatic Evaluation for Text-to-image Generation: Task-decomposed Framework, Distilled Training, and Meta-evaluation Benchmark [62.58869921806019]
  We propose a task decomposition evaluation framework based on GPT-4o to automatically construct a new training dataset. We design innovative training strategies to effectively distill GPT-4o's evaluation capabilities into a 7B open-source MLLM, MiniCPM-V-2.6. Experimental results demonstrate that our distilled open-source MLLM significantly outperforms the current state-of-the-art GPT-4o-base baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T08:06:06Z)
• Improving Retrieval Augmented Language Model with Self-Reasoning [20.715106330314605]
  We propose a novel self-reasoning framework aimed at improving the reliability and traceability of RALMs.<n>The framework involves constructing self-reason trajectories with three processes: a relevance-aware process, an evidence-aware selective process, and a trajectory analysis process.<n>We have evaluated our framework across four public datasets to demonstrate the superiority of our method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-29T09:05:10Z)
• Enabling Language Models to Implicitly Learn Self-Improvement [49.16868302881804]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in open-ended text generation tasks. We propose an ImPlicit Self-ImprovemenT (PIT) framework that implicitly learns the improvement goal from human preference data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T04:29:40Z)
• 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)
• Can LLMs Express Their Uncertainty? An Empirical Evaluation of Confidence Elicitation in LLMs [60.61002524947733]
  Previous confidence elicitation methods rely on white-box access to internal model information or model fine-tuning. This leads to a growing need to explore the untapped area of black-box approaches for uncertainty estimation. We define a systematic framework with three components: prompting strategies for eliciting verbalized confidence, sampling methods for generating multiple responses, and aggregation techniques for computing consistency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-22T17:31:44Z)

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.