I-CALM: Incentivizing Confidence-Aware Abstention for LLM Hallucination Mitigation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.03904v1
• Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2026 00:15:41 GMT
• Title: I-CALM: Incentivizing Confidence-Aware Abstention for LLM Hallucination Mitigation
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) frequently produce confident but incorrect answers.<n>We study whether prompt-only interventions can reduce hallucination risk without modifying the model.<n>Results show the framework can improve selective answering on factual questions without retraining.
• Score: 2.688126466709795
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) frequently produce confident but incorrect answers, partly because common binary scoring conventions reward answering over honestly expressing uncertainty. We study whether prompt-only interventions -- explicitly announcing reward schemes for answer-versus-abstain decisions plus humility-oriented normative principles -- can reduce hallucination risk without modifying the model. Our focus is epistemic abstention on factual questions with a verifiable answer, where current LLMs often fail to abstain despite being uncertain about their answers. We first assess self-reported verbal confidence as a usable uncertainty signal, showing stability under prompt paraphrasing and reasonable calibration against a token-probability baseline. We then study I-CALM, a prompt-based framework that (i) elicits verbal confidence, (ii) partially rewards abstention through explicit reward schemes, and (iii) adds lightweight normative principles emphasizing truthfulness, humility, and responsibility. Using GPT-5 mini on PopQA as the main setting, we find that confidence-eliciting, abstention-rewarding prompts, especially with norms, reduce the false-answer rate on answered cases mainly by identifying and shifting error-prone cases to abstention and re-calibrating their confidence. This trades coverage for reliability while leaving forced-answer performance largely unchanged. Varying the abstention reward yields a clear abstention-hallucination frontier. Overall, results show the framework can improve selective answering on factual questions without retraining, with the magnitude of effect varying across models and datasets. Code is available at the following https://github.com/binzeli/hallucinationControl.

Related papers

• BALTO: Balanced Token-Level Policy Optimization for Hallucination Mitigation [51.22170603236523]
  We propose a Balanced Token-level Policy Optimization framework for hallucination mitigation.<n>BalTO extracts checkable factual claims, verifies them against the reference context, and projects claim-level judgments to token-level labels.<n>Experiments on ConFiQA, RAGTruth, and FinLLM-Eval show that BALTO achieves the highest faithfulness across all six model--benchmark settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-14T16:25:59Z)
• Towards Lightweight Reliability: Using Soft Prompts for Hallucination Mitigation in Large Language Models [5.019869660665509]
  Large language models (LLMs) have seen widespread adoption across various domains, yet their reliability is frequently undermined by hallucinations.<n>In high-stakes domains, these errors can reduce trust and introduce real-world risk.<n>We present a parameter-efficient approach that uses soft prompts to mitigate hallucinated content and promote responsible abstention.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-30T23:02:33Z)
• VL-Calibration: Decoupled Confidence Calibration for Large Vision-Language Models Reasoning [5.887179947363831]
  Large Vision Language Models (LVLMs) achieve strong multimodal reasoning but frequently exhibit hallucinations and incorrect responses with high certainty.<n>Existing verbalized confidence calibration methods, largely developed for text-only LLMs, typically optimize a single holistic confidence score using binary answer-level correctness.<n>We propose VL-Calibration, a reinforcement learning framework that explicitly decouples confidence into visual and reasoning confidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-10T17:47:19Z)
• Confidence Before Answering: A Paradigm Shift for Efficient LLM Uncertainty Estimation [47.91529693614168]
  Existing methods are predominantly answer-first, producing confidence only after generating an answer.<n>We study a confidence-first paradigm, where the model outputs its confidence before answering, interpreting this score as the model's probability of answering the question correctly.<n>We propose CoCA, a reinforcement learning framework that jointly optimize confidence calibration and answer accuracy via segmented credit assignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-06T04:03:13Z)
• Stop Rewarding Hallucinated Steps: Faithfulness-Aware Step-Level Reinforcement Learning for Small Reasoning Models [59.6715047267181]
  Small reasoning models (SRMs) are prone to hallucinations, especially in intermediate reasoning steps.<n>Existing mitigation methods based on online reinforcement learning rely on outcome-based rewards or coarse-grained chain-of-thought evaluation.<n>We propose Faithfulness-Aware Step-Level Reinforcement Learning (FaithRL), introducing step-level supervision via explicit faithfulness rewards from a process reward model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-05T17:15:12Z)
• Decomposed Prompting Does Not Fix Knowledge Gaps, But Helps Models Say "I Don't Know" [47.930782177987446]
  Large language models often struggle to recognize their knowledge limits in closed-book question answering, leading to confident hallucinations.<n>We evaluate three task-equivalent prompting regimes: Direct, Assistive, and Incremental, across different model scales and multi-hop QA benchmarks.<n>Because factual knowledge is stable while hallucinations are agreement, cross-regime provides a precise signal of internal uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-04T18:39:58Z)
• Fact-Checking with Large Language Models via Probabilistic Certainty and Consistency [7.806516365113592]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in applications requiring factual accuracy.<n>While fact-checking can mitigate these errors, existing methods typically retrieve external evidence indiscriminately.<n>We introduce Probabilistic Certainty and Consistency (PCC), a framework that estimates factual confidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-05T21:57:41Z)
• Increasing LLM response trustworthiness using voting ensembles [0.20524609401792396]
  We introduce a theoretical framework for question answering and show that, by permitting ensembles to "abstain" from providing an answer when the dominant response falls short, it is possible to dramatically increase the trustworthiness of the remaining answers.<n>We observe that large gains in answer trustworthiness can be achieved using highly restrictive voting ensembles, while incurring relatively modest reductions in response yield and accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-05T06:02:44Z)
• Harnessing RLHF for Robust Unanswerability Recognition and Trustworthy Response Generation in LLMs [2.217239320172707]
  This paper introduces Self-Aware LLM for Unanswerability (SALU), a novel approach that deeply integrates unanswerability detection directly within the generative process.<n>SALU is trained using a multi-task learning framework for both standard Question Answering (QA) and explicit abstention generation for unanswerable queries.<n>It consistently outperforms strong baselines, including hybrid LLM-classifier systems, in overall accuracy for correctly answering or abstaining from questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-22T18:44:18Z)
• Uncertainty Distillation: Teaching Language Models to Express Semantic Confidence [16.311538811237536]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for factual question-answering.<n>For these verbalized expressions of uncertainty to be meaningful, they should reflect the error rates at the expressed level of confidence.<n>We propose a simple procedure, uncertainty distillation, to teach an LLM to calibrated semantic confidences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-18T21:29:29Z)
• Aligning Large Language Models for Faithful Integrity Against Opposing Argument [71.33552795870544]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in complex reasoning tasks.<n>They can be easily misled by unfaithful arguments during conversations, even when their original statements are correct.<n>We propose a novel framework, named Alignment for Faithful Integrity with Confidence Estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-02T16:38:21Z)
• Understanding the Relationship between Prompts and Response Uncertainty in Large Language Models [55.332004960574004]
  Large language models (LLMs) are widely used in decision-making, but their reliability, especially in critical tasks like healthcare, is not well-established.<n>This paper investigates how the uncertainty of responses generated by LLMs relates to the information provided in the input prompt.<n>We propose a prompt-response concept model that explains how LLMs generate responses and helps understand the relationship between prompts and response uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T11:19:58Z)
• Mitigating LLM Hallucinations via Conformal Abstention [70.83870602967625]
  We develop a principled procedure for determining when a large language model should abstain from responding in a general domain. We leverage conformal prediction techniques to develop an abstention procedure that benefits from rigorous theoretical guarantees on the hallucination rate (error rate) Experimentally, our resulting conformal abstention method reliably bounds the hallucination rate on various closed-book, open-domain generative question answering datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T11:32:03Z)

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.