Reinforcement Learning with Metacognitive Feedback Elicits Faithful Uncertainty Expression in LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.32032v1
• Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2026 17:56:01 GMT
• Title: Reinforcement Learning with Metacognitive Feedback Elicits Faithful Uncertainty Expression in LLMs
• Abstract summary: We apply reinforcement learning with metacognitive feedback to the problem of faithful calibration.<n>Experiments show RLMF achieves generalizable, state-of-the-art FC on diverse tasks.<n> RLMF surpasses standard RL by up to 63% while enhancing models' ability to assess and express their own capability limits.
• Score: 60.80435138270317
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Metacognition is a critical component of intelligence that describes the ability to monitor and regulate one's own cognitive processes. Yet LLMs exhibit systemic deficiencies in key metacognitive faculties: they hallucinate with high confidence, fail to recognize knowledge boundaries, and misrepresent their internal uncertainty--undermining trustworthiness and reliability. Since monitoring task performance and adapting behavior accordingly are central to metacognition, we posit that models capable of accurately judging their own performance are better positioned to improve it. We operationalize this idea via two novel mechanisms: reinforcement learning with metacognitive feedback (RLMF), a paradigm to refine completion rankings during preference optimization based on the quality of a model's self-judgments of performance, and metacognitive data selection, which uses similar self-judgments to identify high-value training examples, outperforming naive active learning. We apply these innovations to the problem of faithful calibration (FC), a task that is itself fundamentally metacognitive: the goal is to align expressed with intrinsic uncertainty, difficult even for frontier LLMs. We adopt a two-stage, decoupled approach, first using these methods to calibrate the faithfulness of models' self-reported confidence scores, then mapping to natural, context-adaptable linguistic uncertainty via targeted output editing. Extensive experiments show RLMF achieves generalizable, state-of-the-art FC on diverse tasks while preserving accuracy. Further, RLMF surpasses standard RL by up to 63% while enhancing models' ability to assess and express their own capability limits. This positions RLMF as a promising paradigm to enhance LLM metacognition toward improved abilities and alignment, and suggests metacognitive performance as an effective RL signal to overcome limits of prior intrinsic feedback methods.

Related papers

• Decomposing and Steering Functional Metacognition in Large Language Models [7.62618887128252]
  We show that large language models maintain a decomposable space of functional metacognitive states.<n>We show that these states are linearly decodable from internal activations and exhibit distinct layer-wise profiles.<n>Our findings suggest that benchmark performance reflects not only task competence but also the activation of specific functional metacognitive states.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-09T13:22:47Z)
• Process Supervision of Confidence Margin for Calibrated LLM Reasoning [52.373121066425455]
  Scaling test-time computation with reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as a reliable path to improve large language models (LLM) reasoning ability.<n>Yet, outcome-based reward often incentivizes models to be overconfident, leading to hallucinations, unreliable confidence-based control, and unnecessary compute allocation.<n>We introduce Reinforcement Learning with Confidence Margin (textbfRLCM), a calibration-aware RL framework that jointly optimize correctness and confidence reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-25T14:40:13Z)
• Know What You Know: Metacognitive Entropy Calibration for Verifiable RL Reasoning [31.629261193485053]
  Large reasoning models (LRMs) have emerged as a powerful paradigm for solving complex real-world tasks.<n>Most existing outcome-only RLVR pipelines rely almost exclusively on a binary correctness signal and largely ignore the model's intrinsic uncertainty.<n>We propose EGPO, a metacognitive entropy calibration framework that explicitly integrates intrinsic uncertainty into RLVR for enhancing LRMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-26T08:40:06Z)
• Beyond Words: Evaluating and Bridging Epistemic Divergence in User-Agent Interaction via Theory of Mind [8.740788873949471]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have developed rapidly and are widely applied to both general-purpose and professional tasks.<n>They still struggle to comprehend and respond to the true user needs when intentions and instructions are imprecisely conveyed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-14T16:01:59Z)
• On Robustness and Chain-of-Thought Consistency of RL-Finetuned VLMs [15.301640007799735]
  We show that simple, controlled textual perturbations--misleading captions or incorrect chain-of-thought (CoT) traces--cause substantial drops in robustness and confidence.<n>To better understand these vulnerabilities, we analyze RL fine-tuning dynamics and uncover an accuracy-faithfulness trade-off.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-13T01:12:00Z)
• 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)
• Confidence as a Reward: Transforming LLMs into Reward Models [54.98336080630691]
  Confidence-as-a-Reward (CRew) is a training-free method that utilizes token-level confidence in the model's final answers as a proxy for reward.<n>We show that CRew outperforms existing training-free reward approaches on the MATH500 and RewardMATH benchmarks.<n>We propose CRew-DPO, a training strategy that constructs preference data from confidence scores combined with correctness signals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-15T12:51:47Z)
• MetaFaith: Faithful Natural Language Uncertainty Expression in LLMs [66.14178164421794]
  We introduce MetaFaith, a novel prompt-based calibration approach inspired by human metacognition.<n>We show that MetaFaith robustly improves faithful calibration across diverse models and task domains, enabling up to 61% improvement in faithfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T17:54:08Z)
• Tuning-Free Accountable Intervention for LLM Deployment -- A Metacognitive Approach [55.613461060997004]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have catalyzed transformative advances across a spectrum of natural language processing tasks. We propose an innovative textitmetacognitive approach, dubbed textbfCLEAR, to equip LLMs with capabilities for self-aware error identification and correction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-08T19:18:53Z)
• Self-Alignment for Factuality: Mitigating Hallucinations in LLMs via Self-Evaluation [71.91287418249688]
  Large language models (LLMs) often struggle with factual inaccuracies, even when they hold relevant knowledge. We leverage the self-evaluation capability of an LLM to provide training signals that steer the model towards factuality. We show that the proposed self-alignment approach substantially enhances factual accuracy over Llama family models across three key knowledge-intensive tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-14T15:52:42Z)
• MR-GSM8K: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Large Language Model Evaluation [60.65820977963331]
  We introduce a novel evaluation paradigm for Large Language Models (LLMs) This paradigm shifts the emphasis from result-oriented assessments, which often neglect the reasoning process, to a more comprehensive evaluation. By applying this paradigm in the GSM8K dataset, we have developed the MR-GSM8K benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-28T15:49:43Z)

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.