REVIEW 12 cited by
A Survey on Uncertainty Quantification of Large Language Models: Taxonomy, Open Research Challenges, and Future Directions
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
A Survey on Uncertainty Quantification of Large Language Models: Taxonomy, Open Research Challenges, and Future Directions
read the original abstract
The remarkable performance of large language models (LLMs) in content generation, coding, and common-sense reasoning has spurred widespread integration into many facets of society. However, integration of LLMs raises valid questions on their reliability and trustworthiness, given their propensity to generate hallucinations: plausible, factually-incorrect responses, which are expressed with striking confidence. Previous work has shown that hallucinations and other non-factual responses generated by LLMs can be detected by examining the uncertainty of the LLM in its response to the pertinent prompt, driving significant research efforts devoted to quantifying the uncertainty of LLMs. This survey seeks to provide an extensive review of existing uncertainty quantification methods for LLMs, identifying their salient features, along with their strengths and weaknesses. We present existing methods within a relevant taxonomy, unifying ostensibly disparate methods to aid understanding of the state of the art. Furthermore, we highlight applications of uncertainty quantification methods for LLMs, spanning chatbot and textual applications to embodied artificial intelligence applications in robotics. We conclude with open research challenges in uncertainty quantification of LLMs, seeking to motivate future research.
Forward citations
Cited by 12 Pith papers
-
DECK: A Consistency x Confidence Taxonomy of LLM Hallucinations
The DECK taxonomy partitions LLM hallucinations into four detectability regimes using consistency and confidence axes, mapping each to scorer families and identifying a universal blind spot for output-level uncertaint...
-
Gradients with Respect to Semantics Preserving Embeddings Tell the Uncertainty of Large Language Models
SemGrad is a gradient-based uncertainty quantification technique for free-form LLM generation that operates in semantic space using a Semantic Preservation Score to select stable embeddings.
-
Gradients with Respect to Semantics Preserving Embeddings Tell the Uncertainty of Large Language Models
SemGrad measures LLM uncertainty via gradients in semantic space using a Semantic Preservation Score to select embeddings, with HybridGrad combining it with parameter gradients to outperform sampling-based baselines e...
-
Functional Entropy: Predicting Functional Correctness in LLM-Generated Code with Uncertainty Quantification
Introduces functional equivalence methods and functional entropy to predict functional correctness of LLM-generated code via uncertainty quantification, outperforming NLI-based baselines in most tested settings.
-
Zero-Shot Confidence Estimation for Small LLMs: When Supervised Baselines Aren't Worth Training
Average token log-probability provides a zero-shot confidence signal for small LLMs that matches supervised baselines in-distribution and outperforms them out-of-distribution, with a new retrieval-conditional variant ...
-
How Language Models Process Out-of-Distribution Inputs: A Two-Pathway Framework
LLM OOD detectors are length-confounded; a two-pathway embedding-plus-trajectory framework detects covert OOD inputs at 0.721 average AUROC and 0.850 on jailbreaks.
-
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.
-
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.
-
INSIGHT: INference-time Sequence Introspection for Generating Help Triggers in Vision-Language-Action Models
Token-level uncertainty sequences from a VLA policy, classified by a small transformer, predict when a robot should request human help better than static uncertainty scores.
-
Measuring and mitigating overreliance to build human-compatible AI
The paper consolidates risks of overreliance on LLMs, identifies gaps in current measurement approaches, and proposes mitigation strategies to keep AI as a human-compatible thought partner.
-
Breaking the Chains of Probability: Neutrosophic Logic as a New Framework for Epistemic Uncertainty in Large Language Models
Empirical tests on four GPT models across five uncertainty types found hyper-truth states (T+I+F>1) in 35% of cases, mostly under ethical contradictions and paradoxes.
-
LLM-Powered AI Agent Systems and Their Applications in Industry
A survey categorizing LLM-powered agent systems into software-based, physical, and hybrid types, covering industrial applications and challenges such as latency and security.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.