A Formal Framework for Uncertainty Analysis of Text Generation with Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.26363v1
• Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 12:44:37 GMT
• Title: A Formal Framework for Uncertainty Analysis of Text Generation with Large Language Models
• Abstract summary: Generation of texts using Large Language Models (LLMs) is inherently uncertain.<n>We provide a formal framework for the measurement of uncertainty that takes these different aspects into account.
• Score: 4.554894288663752
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The generation of texts using Large Language Models (LLMs) is inherently uncertain, with sources of uncertainty being not only the generation of texts, but also the prompt used and the downstream interpretation. Within this work, we provide a formal framework for the measurement of uncertainty that takes these different aspects into account. Our framework models prompting, generation, and interpretation as interconnected autoregressive processes that can be combined into a single sampling tree. We introduce filters and objective functions to describe how different aspects of uncertainty can be expressed over the sampling tree and demonstrate how to express existing approaches towards uncertainty through these functions. With our framework we show not only how different methods are formally related and can be reduced to a common core, but also point out additional aspects of uncertainty that have not yet been studied.

Related papers

• Large Language Models as Quasi-crystals: Coherence Without Repetition in Generative Text [0.0]
  essay proposes an analogy between large language models (LLMs) and quasicrystals, systems that exhibit global coherence without periodic repetition, generated through local constraints.<n> Drawing on the history of quasicrystals, it highlights an alternative mode of coherence in generative language: constraint-based organization without repetition or symbolic intent.<n>This essay aims to reframe the current discussion around large language models, not by rejecting existing methods, but by suggesting an additional axis of interpretation grounded in structure rather than semantics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-16T11:27:47Z)
• A Causal Lens for Evaluating Faithfulness Metrics [11.80379109128303]
  Causal Diagnosticity is a framework that serves as a common testbed to evaluate faithfulness metrics for natural language explanations.<n>Our framework employs the concept of diagnosticity, and uses model-editing methods to generate faithful-unfaithful explanation pairs.<n>We evaluate prominent faithfulness metrics, including post-hoc explanation and chain-of-thought-based methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-26T05:35:53Z)
• A statistically consistent measure of semantic uncertainty using Language Models [3.4933610074113464]
  We propose a novel measure of semantic uncertainty, semantic spectral entropy, that is statistically consistent under mild assumptions.<n>This measure is implemented through a straightforward algorithm that relies solely on standard, pretrained language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-01T17:55:58Z)
• CLUE: Concept-Level Uncertainty Estimation for Large Language Models [49.92690111618016]
  We propose a novel framework for Concept-Level Uncertainty Estimation for Large Language Models (LLMs) We leverage LLMs to convert output sequences into concept-level representations, breaking down sequences into individual concepts and measuring the uncertainty of each concept separately. We conduct experiments to demonstrate that CLUE can provide more interpretable uncertainty estimation results compared with sentence-level uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-04T18:27:12Z)
• 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)
• Uncertainty Quantification for In-Context Learning of Large Language Models [52.891205009620364]
  In-context learning has emerged as a groundbreaking ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) We propose a novel formulation and corresponding estimation method to quantify both types of uncertainties. The proposed method offers an unsupervised way to understand the prediction of in-context learning in a plug-and-play fashion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-15T18:46:24Z)
• Distinguishing the Knowable from the Unknowable with Language Models [15.471748481627143]
  In the absence of ground-truth probabilities, we explore a setting where, in order to disentangle a given uncertainty, a significantly larger model stands in as a proxy for the ground truth. We show that small linear probes trained on the embeddings of frozen, pretrained models accurately predict when larger models will be more confident at the token level. We propose a fully unsupervised method that achieves non-trivial accuracy on the same task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-05T22:22:49Z)
• Modeling Uncertainty in Personalized Emotion Prediction with Normalizing Flows [6.32047610997385]
  This work proposes a novel approach to capture the uncertainty of the forecast using conditional Normalizing Flows. We validated our method on three challenging, subjective NLP tasks, including emotion recognition and hate speech. The information brought by the developed methods makes it possible to build hybrid models whose effectiveness surpasses classic solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-10T23:21:41Z)
• CUE: An Uncertainty Interpretation Framework for Text Classifiers Built on Pre-Trained Language Models [28.750894873827068]
  We propose a novel framework, called CUE, which aims to interpret uncertainties inherent in the predictions of PLM-based models. By comparing the difference in predictive uncertainty between the perturbed and the original text representations, we are able to identify the latent dimensions responsible for uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-06T11:37:46Z)
• A Latent-Variable Model for Intrinsic Probing [93.62808331764072]
  We propose a novel latent-variable formulation for constructing intrinsic probes.<n>We find empirical evidence that pre-trained representations develop a cross-lingually entangled notion of morphosyntax.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-20T15:01:12Z)
• On the Faithfulness Measurements for Model Interpretations [100.2730234575114]
  Post-hoc interpretations aim to uncover how natural language processing (NLP) models make predictions. To tackle these issues, we start with three criteria: the removal-based criterion, the sensitivity of interpretations, and the stability of interpretations. Motivated by the desideratum of these faithfulness notions, we introduce a new class of interpretation methods that adopt techniques from the adversarial domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-18T09:19:44Z)
• Measuring Association Between Labels and Free-Text Rationales [60.58672852655487]
  In interpretable NLP, we require faithful rationales that reflect the model's decision-making process for an explained instance. We demonstrate that pipelines, existing models for faithful extractive rationalization on information-extraction style tasks, do not extend as reliably to "reasoning" tasks requiring free-text rationales. We turn to models that jointly predict and rationalize, a class of widely used high-performance models for free-text rationalization whose faithfulness is not yet established.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-24T03:40:56Z)

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.