Sensitivity Uncertainty Alignment in Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.20903v1
• Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2026 17:53:12 GMT
• Title: Sensitivity Uncertainty Alignment in Large Language Models
• Abstract summary: We propose a framework for analyzing failures of large language models under adversarial and ambiguous inputs.<n>We define a scalar score, SUA_theta(x), capturing the difference between distributional sensitivity and predictive entropy.<n>We introduce SUA-TR, a training method combining consistency regularization and entropy alignment, along with an abstention rule for safer inference.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: We propose Sensitivity-Uncertainty Alignment (SUA), a framework for analyzing failures of large language models under adversarial and ambiguous inputs. We argue that adversarial sensitivity and ambiguity reflect a common issue: misalignment between prediction instability and model uncertainty. A reliable model should express higher uncertainty when its predictions are unstable; failure to do so leads to miscalibration. We define a scalar score, SUA_theta(x), capturing the difference between distributional sensitivity and predictive entropy. We show that minimizing its positive part bounds worst-case perturbed risk and relates to calibration error. We also formalize ambiguity collapse, where models produce overconfident outputs despite multiple valid interpretations. We introduce SUA-TR, a training method combining consistency regularization and entropy alignment, along with an abstention rule for safer inference. Across tasks including question answering and classification, SUA better identifies model failures than entropy or self-consistency alone. The framework is model-agnostic and provides a basis for improving reliability in evolving language models.

Related papers

• It depends: Incorporating correlations for joint aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties of high-dimensional output spaces [23.472868138533926]
  Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) plays a vital role in enhancing the reliability of deep learning model predictions.<n>This paper addresses the dual nature of uncertainty, focusing on their joint integration in high-dimensional regression tasks.<n>We propose a novel approach that approximates the resulting joint uncertainty using a low-rank plus diagonal covariance structure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-25T13:08:17Z)
• SAGE: Answer-Conditioned Uncertainty Targets for Verbal Uncertainty Alignment [20.5795766462733]
  We propose a group-level uncertainty target that constructs an answer-conditioned uncertainty geometry over sampled responses.<n>Experiments show improved uncertainty ranking, lower calibration error, and reduced overconfidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-09T23:17:16Z)
• Aligning LLM Uncertainty with Human Disagreement in Subjectivity Analysis [57.78407973423517]
  We advocate uncertainty-aware subjectivity analysis, where models are expected to make predictions while expressing uncertainty that reflects human disagreement.<n>To operationalize this perspective, we propose a two-phase Disagreement Perception and Uncertainty Alignment framework.<n> Experiments on three subjectivity analysis tasks show that DPUA preserves task performance while better aligning model uncertainty with human disagreement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-11T11:52:58Z)
• CUPID: A Plug-in Framework for Joint Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty Estimation with a Single Model [1.6855257501750571]
  CUPID (Comprehensive Uncertainty Plug-in estImation moDel) is a general-purpose module that jointly estimates aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty without modifying or retraining the base model.<n>We evaluate CUPID across a range of tasks, including classification, regression, and out-of-distribution detection.<n>The results show that CUPID consistently delivers competitive performance while offering layer-wise insights into the origins of uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-11T13:18:10Z)
• 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)
• Decision-Aware Trust Signal Alignment for SOC Alert Triage [0.0]
  The present paper presents a decision-sensitive trust signal correspondence scheme of SOC alert triage.<n>The framework combines confidence that has been calibrated, lightweight uncertainty cues, and cost-sensitive decision thresholds into coherent decision-support layer.<n>We show that false negatives are greatly amplified by the presence of misaligned displays of confidence, whereas cost weighted loss decreases by orders of magnitude between models with decision aligned trust signals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-08T01:41:54Z)
• Trusted Uncertainty in Large Language Models: A Unified Framework for Confidence Calibration and Risk-Controlled Refusal [31.458406135473805]
  We present UniCR, a unified framework that turns heterogeneous uncertainty evidence into a calibrated probability of correctness.<n>UniCR learns a lightweight calibration head with temperature scaling and proper scoring.<n>Experiments on short-form QA, code generation with execution tests, and retrieval-augmented long-form QA show consistent improvements in calibration metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-01T13:14:58Z)
• Selective Learning: Towards Robust Calibration with Dynamic Regularization [79.92633587914659]
  Miscalibration in deep learning refers to there is a discrepancy between the predicted confidence and performance. We introduce Dynamic Regularization (DReg) which aims to learn what should be learned during training thereby circumventing the confidence adjusting trade-off.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-13T11:25:20Z)
• Improving the Reliability of Large Language Models by Leveraging Uncertainty-Aware In-Context Learning [76.98542249776257]
  Large-scale language models often face the challenge of "hallucination" We introduce an uncertainty-aware in-context learning framework to empower the model to enhance or reject its output in response to uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-07T12:06:53Z)
• Robustness and Accuracy Could Be Reconcilable by (Proper) Definition [109.62614226793833]
  The trade-off between robustness and accuracy has been widely studied in the adversarial literature. We find that it may stem from the improperly defined robust error, which imposes an inductive bias of local invariance. By definition, SCORE facilitates the reconciliation between robustness and accuracy, while still handling the worst-case uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-21T10:36:09Z)
• Dense Uncertainty Estimation via an Ensemble-based Conditional Latent Variable Model [68.34559610536614]
  We argue that the aleatoric uncertainty is an inherent attribute of the data and can only be correctly estimated with an unbiased oracle model. We propose a new sampling and selection strategy at train time to approximate the oracle model for aleatoric uncertainty estimation. Our results show that our solution achieves both accurate deterministic results and reliable uncertainty estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-11-22T08:54:10Z)

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.