Bayesian Elicitation with LLMs: Model Size Helps, Extra "Reasoning" Doesn't Always

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.01896v1
• Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2026 11:00:13 GMT
• Title: Bayesian Elicitation with LLMs: Model Size Helps, Extra "Reasoning" Doesn't Always
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have been proposed as alternatives to human experts for estimating unknown quantities with associated uncertainty.<n>We test this by asking eleven LLMs to estimate population statistics, such as health prevalence rates, personality trait distributions, and labor market figures.<n>We vary each model's reasoning effort to test whether more "thinking" improves results.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have been proposed as alternatives to human experts for estimating unknown quantities with associated uncertainty, a process known as Bayesian elicitation. We test this by asking eleven LLMs to estimate population statistics, such as health prevalence rates, personality trait distributions, and labor market figures, and to express their uncertainty as 95\% credible intervals. We vary each model's reasoning effort (low, medium, high) to test whether more "thinking" improves results. Our findings reveal three key results. First, larger, more capable models produce more accurate estimates, but increasing reasoning effort provides no consistent benefit. Second, all models are severely overconfident: their 95\% intervals contain the true value only 9--44\% of the time, far below the expected 95\%. Third, a statistical recalibration technique called conformal prediction can correct this overconfidence, expanding the intervals to achieve the intended coverage. In a preliminary experiment, giving models web search access degraded predictions for already-accurate models, while modestly improving predictions for weaker ones. Models performed well on commonly discussed topics but struggled with specialized health data. These results indicate that LLM uncertainty estimates require statistical correction before they can be used in decision-making.

Related papers

• Variational Visual Question Answering for Uncertainty-Aware Selective Prediction [17.353372524615363]
  We show the effectiveness and competitive edge of variational Bayes for selective prediction in Visual Question Answering (VQA) for the first time.<n>This method improves calibration and yields significant gains for selective prediction on VQA and Visual Reasoning.<n>In addition, we propose a new risk-averse selector that outperforms standard sample averaging by considering the variance of predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-14T17:40:22Z)
• Always Tell Me The Odds: Fine-grained Conditional Probability Estimation [37.950889606305836]
  We present a state-of-the-art model for fine-grained probability estimation of propositions conditioned on context.<n>We show that our approach consistently outperforms existing fine-tuned and prompting-based methods by a large margin.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-02T21:33:18Z)
• Uncertainty Estimation of Large Language Models in Medical Question Answering [60.72223137560633]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) show promise for natural language generation in healthcare, but risk hallucinating factually incorrect information. We benchmark popular uncertainty estimation (UE) methods with different model sizes on medical question-answering datasets. Our results show that current approaches generally perform poorly in this domain, highlighting the challenge of UE for medical applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-11T16:51:33Z)
• Uncertainty-Calibrated Test-Time Model Adaptation without Forgetting [65.21599711087538]
  Test-time adaptation (TTA) seeks to tackle potential distribution shifts between training and test data by adapting a given model w.r.t. any test sample.<n>Prior methods perform backpropagation for each test sample, resulting in unbearable optimization costs to many applications.<n>We propose an Efficient Anti-Forgetting Test-Time Adaptation (EATA) method which develops an active sample selection criterion to identify reliable and non-redundant samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-18T05:49:45Z)
• Efficient Normalized Conformal Prediction and Uncertainty Quantification for Anti-Cancer Drug Sensitivity Prediction with Deep Regression Forests [0.0]
  Conformal Prediction has emerged as a promising method to pair machine learning models with prediction intervals. We propose a method to estimate the uncertainty of each sample by calculating the variance obtained from a Deep Regression Forest.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-21T19:09:53Z)
• Learning Sample Difficulty from Pre-trained Models for Reliable Prediction [55.77136037458667]
  We propose to utilize large-scale pre-trained models to guide downstream model training with sample difficulty-aware entropy regularization. We simultaneously improve accuracy and uncertainty calibration across challenging benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-20T07:29:23Z)
• Toward Reliable Human Pose Forecasting with Uncertainty [51.628234388046195]
  We develop an open-source library for human pose forecasting, including multiple models, supporting several datasets. We devise two types of uncertainty in the problem to increase performance and convey better trust.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-13T17:56:08Z)
• Reliability-Aware Prediction via Uncertainty Learning for Person Image Retrieval [51.83967175585896]
  UAL aims at providing reliability-aware predictions by considering data uncertainty and model uncertainty simultaneously. Data uncertainty captures the noise" inherent in the sample, while model uncertainty depicts the model's confidence in the sample's prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-24T17:53:20Z)
• Usable Region Estimate for Assessing Practical Usability of Medical Image Segmentation Models [32.56957759180135]
  We aim to quantitatively measure the practical usability of medical image segmentation models. We first propose a measure, Correctness-Confidence Rank Correlation (CCRC), to capture how predictions' confidence estimates correlate with their correctness scores in rank. We then propose Usable Region Estimate (URE), which simultaneously quantifies predictions' correctness and reliability of confidence assessments in one estimate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-01T02:33:44Z)
• UNITE: Uncertainty-based Health Risk Prediction Leveraging Multi-sourced Data [81.00385374948125]
  We present UNcertaInTy-based hEalth risk prediction (UNITE) model. UNITE provides accurate disease risk prediction and uncertainty estimation leveraging multi-sourced health data. We evaluate UNITE on real-world disease risk prediction tasks: nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NASH) and Alzheimer's disease (AD) UNITE achieves up to 0.841 in F1 score for AD detection, up to 0.609 in PR-AUC for NASH detection, and outperforms various state-of-the-art baselines by up to $19%$ over the best baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-22T02:28:11Z)
• Prediction Confidence from Neighbors [0.0]
  The inability of Machine Learning (ML) models to successfully extrapolate correct predictions from out-of-distribution (OoD) samples is a major hindrance to the application of ML in critical applications. We show that feature space distance is a meaningful measure that can provide confidence in predictions. This enables earlier and safer deployment of models in critical applications and is vital for deploying models under ever-changing conditions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-31T09:26:09Z)

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.