REVIEW 2 cited by
A Survey of Calibration Process for Black-Box LLMs
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
read the original abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable performance in semantic understanding and generation, yet accurately assessing their output reliability remains a significant challenge. While numerous studies have explored calibration techniques, they primarily focus on White-Box LLMs with accessible parameters. Black-Box LLMs, despite their superior performance, pose heightened requirements for calibration techniques due to their API-only interaction constraints. Although recent researches have achieved breakthroughs in black-box LLMs calibration, a systematic survey of these methodologies is still lacking. To bridge this gap, we presents the first comprehensive survey on calibration techniques for black-box LLMs. We first define the Calibration Process of LLMs as comprising two interrelated key steps: Confidence Estimation and Calibration. Second, we conduct a systematic review of applicable methods within black-box settings, and provide insights on the unique challenges and connections in implementing these key steps. Furthermore, we explore typical applications of Calibration Process in black-box LLMs and outline promising future research directions, providing new perspectives for enhancing reliability and human-machine alignment. This is our GitHub link: https://github.com/LiangruXie/Calibration-Process-in-Black-Box-LLMs
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
A Systematic Evaluation of Black-Box Uncertainty Estimation Methods for Large Language Models
A unified benchmark of 24 black-box UE methods for LLMs finds no universal winner but favors methods that reason over answer candidates and hybrid combinations of signals.
-
Can You Trust the Confidence? ConfBench for Vision-Language Models on Document Extraction
Vision-language models vary widely in how trustworthy their confidence scores are on document extraction, with stronger models and OCR-plus-image input helping most, as measured on the new ConfBench benchmark.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.