Just how sure are you? Improving Verbalized Uncertainty Calibration in Medical VQA

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.27023v1
• Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2026 13:33:58 GMT
• Title: Just how sure are you? Improving Verbalized Uncertainty Calibration in Medical VQA
• Abstract summary: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) applied to Medical Visual Question Answering (VQA) tend to produce overconfident outputs regardless of actual correctness.<n>This work proposes a training based framework that finetunes MLLMs to improve their calibration using a composite loss function.
• Score: 0.16383644639245779
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) applied to Medical Visual Question Answering (VQA) tend to produce overconfident outputs regardless of actual correctness, and existing verbalized confidence calibration methods, developed primarily for text only LLMs, do not account for the multimodal nature of medical image understanding. This work proposes a training based framework that finetunes MLLMs to improve their calibration using a composite loss function combining a Brier style calibration term, an anchor regularizer that prevents confidence collapse toward extreme values, a contrastive image text alignment term, and a KL based model stabilization term. The alignment signal is derived from a $2 \times 2$ factorial perturbation design that crosses image presence with text integrity, probing the reliance of the model on visual modality input versus language priors. Finally, a top K KL divergence regularizer is used to protect the answering ability of the model during finetuning. Across three Medical VQA benchmarks and two architectures (MedGemma 4B IT and Qwen2 VL 7B Instruct), our method reduces calibration error by 60% or more, and improves discrimination by 26% or more, while preserving predictive accuracy. On average across benchmarks, the technique outperforms prompting based, sampling based, and training based approaches, and ablation experiments confirm that each component of the loss function is indeed necessary for improving the calibration. All code for the experiments is publicly available.

Related papers

• EVADE: Evidence-Verified Agentic Diagnosis with Escape [0.880899367147235]
  EVADE is an inferential, non-training method that enhances the safety of deploying a single frozen VLM.<n>It commits only when both the entire image and the zoomed view responses agree.<n>It reduces expected calibration error (ECE) by up to 45% compared to zero-shot.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-19T11:51:24Z)
• CaliDist: Calibrating Large Language Models via Behavioral Robustness to Distraction [51.56484100374058]
  Existing calibration methods for Large Language Models (LLMs) often overlook a critical dimension of trustworthiness: a model's behavioral robustness.<n>We introduce textscCaliDist, a novel post-hoc calibration approach that directly measures and penalizes a model's susceptibility to distraction.<n>textscCaliDist consistently achieves lower Expected Error (ECE) and Brier Score compared with strong baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T07:27:53Z)
• LATA: Laplacian-Assisted Transductive Adaptation for Conformal Uncertainty in Medical VLMs [61.06744611795341]
  Medical vision-language models (VLMs) are strong zero-shot recognizers for medical imaging.<n>We propose texttttextbfLATA (Laplacian-Assisted Transductive Adaptation), a textittraining- and label-free refinement.<n>texttttextbfLATA sharpens zero-shot predictions without compromising exchangeability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-19T16:45:38Z)
• On Calibration of Large Language Models: From Response To Capability [66.59139960234326]
  Large language models (LLMs) are widely deployed as general-purpose problem solvers.<n>We introduce capability calibration, which targets the model's expected accuracy on a query.<n>Our results demonstrate that capability-calibrated confidence improves pass@$k$ prediction and inference budget allocation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-14T01:07:45Z)
• CLUE: Non-parametric Verification from Experience via Hidden-State Clustering [64.50919789875233]
  We show that correctness of a solution is encoded as a geometrically separable signature within the trajectory of hidden activations.<n>ClUE consistently outperforms LLM-as-a-judge baselines and matches or exceeds modern confidence-based methods in reranking candidates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-02T02:14:33Z)
• Calibration-Aware Prompt Learning for Medical Vision-Language Models [44.97741487992985]
  Miscalibrated predictions can lead to overconfident errors, undermining clinical trust and decision-making reliability.<n>We introduce CalibPrompt, the first framework to calibrate Med-VLMs during prompt tuning.<n>CalibPrompt consistently improves calibration without drastically affecting clean accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-18T17:59:58Z)
• Calibrating Uncertainty Quantification of Multi-Modal LLMs using Grounding [48.92310906093414]
  We introduce a novel approach for calibrating uncertainty quantification (UQ) tailored for multi-modal large language models (LLMs)<n>We leverage cross-modal consistency in addition to self-consistency to improve the calibration of the multi-modal models.<n>We evaluate the proposed approach across multiple multi-modal tasks, such as medical question answering (Slake) and visual question answering (VQAv2), considering multi-modal models such as LLaVA-Med and LLaVA.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-30T19:19:21Z)
• Data-Driven Calibration of Prediction Sets in Large Vision-Language Models Based on Inductive Conformal Prediction [0.0]
  We propose a model-agnostic uncertainty quantification method that integrates dynamic threshold calibration and cross-modal consistency verification.<n>We show that the framework achieves stable performance across varying calibration-to-test split ratios, underscoring its robustness for real-world deployment in healthcare, autonomous systems, and other safety-sensitive domains.<n>This work bridges the gap between theoretical reliability and practical applicability in multi-modal AI systems, offering a scalable solution for hallucination detection and uncertainty-aware decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-24T15:39:46Z)
• AdaFocal: Calibration-aware Adaptive Focal Loss [8.998525155518836]
  Training with focal loss leads to better calibration than cross-entropy. We propose a calibration-aware adaptive focal loss called AdaFocal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-21T20:19:24Z)
• A Close Look into the Calibration of Pre-trained Language Models [56.998539510508515]
  Pre-trained language models (PLMs) may fail in giving reliable estimates of their predictive uncertainty. We study the dynamic change in PLMs' calibration performance in training. We extend two recently proposed learnable methods that directly collect data to train models to have reasonable confidence estimations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-31T21:31:07Z)

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.