REVIEW 5 cited by
LM-Polygraph: Uncertainty Estimation for Language Models
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
LM-Polygraph: Uncertainty Estimation for Language Models
read the original abstract
Recent advancements in the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) have paved the way for a myriad of groundbreaking applications in various fields. However, a significant challenge arises as these models often "hallucinate", i.e., fabricate facts without providing users an apparent means to discern the veracity of their statements. Uncertainty estimation (UE) methods are one path to safer, more responsible, and more effective use of LLMs. However, to date, research on UE methods for LLMs has been focused primarily on theoretical rather than engineering contributions. In this work, we tackle this issue by introducing LM-Polygraph, a framework with implementations of a battery of state-of-the-art UE methods for LLMs in text generation tasks, with unified program interfaces in Python. Additionally, it introduces an extendable benchmark for consistent evaluation of UE techniques by researchers, and a demo web application that enriches the standard chat dialog with confidence scores, empowering end-users to discern unreliable responses. LM-Polygraph is compatible with the most recent LLMs, including BLOOMz, LLaMA-2, ChatGPT, and GPT-4, and is designed to support future releases of similarly-styled LMs.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
Uncertainty Quantification for Computer-Use Agents: A Benchmark across Vision-Language Models and GUI Grounding Datasets
Argus benchmark shows UQ method rankings for GUI grounding agents are stable within models across datasets but degrade across model classes and to closed-source vendors.
-
Complementing Self-Consistency with Cross-Model Disagreement for Uncertainty Quantification
Cross-model semantic disagreement adds an epistemic uncertainty term that improves total uncertainty estimation over self-consistency alone, helping flag confident errors in LLMs.
-
From Retinal Evidence to Safe Decisions: RETINA-SAFE and ECRT for Hallucination Risk Triage in Medical LLMs
RETINA-SAFE benchmark and ECRT two-stage triage improve hallucination risk detection in medical LLMs for retinal decisions by 0.15-0.19 balanced accuracy over baselines using internal representations and logit shifts.
-
Check Yourself Before You Wreck Yourself: Selectively Quitting Improves LLM Agent Safety
Explicitly instructing LLM agents to quit uncertain or risky tasks improves their safety scores by 0.39 on average in ToolEmu simulations, with a negligible average helpfulness decrease of 0.03.
-
Token-Level Density-Based Uncertainty Quantification Methods for Eliciting Truthfulness of Large Language Models
Adapts multi-layer token-level Mahalanobis distance with supervised linear regression to yield improved uncertainty scores for LLM truthfulness tasks.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.