Pith. sign in

REVIEW 16 cited by

Confidence Matters: Revisiting Intrinsic Self-Correction Capabilities of Large Language Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

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

arxiv 2402.12563 v3 pith:FKVGHVNP submitted 2024-02-19 cs.CL cs.AI

Loka Li , Zhenhao Chen , Guangyi Chen , Yixuan Zhang , Yusheng Su , Eric Xing , Kun Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords self-correctionllmsconfidencecapabilitiesintrinsicmodelsfactorframework
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

The recent success of Large Language Models (LLMs) has catalyzed an increasing interest in their self-correction capabilities. This paper presents a comprehensive investigation into the intrinsic self-correction of LLMs, attempting to address the ongoing debate about its feasibility. Our research has identified an important latent factor - the "confidence" of LLMs - during the self-correction process. Overlooking this factor may cause the models to over-criticize themselves, resulting in unreliable conclusions regarding the efficacy of self-correction. We have experimentally observed that LLMs possess the capability to understand the "confidence" in their own responses. It motivates us to develop an "If-or-Else" (IoE) prompting framework, designed to guide LLMs in assessing their own "confidence", facilitating intrinsic self-corrections. We conduct extensive experiments and demonstrate that our IoE-based Prompt can achieve a consistent improvement regarding the accuracy of self-corrected responses over the initial answers. Our study not only sheds light on the underlying factors affecting self-correction in LLMs, but also introduces a practical framework that utilizes the IoE prompting principle to efficiently improve self-correction capabilities with "confidence". The code is available at https://github.com/MBZUAI-CLeaR/IoE-Prompting.git.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 16 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. The Calibration Floor: Format Repair Can Masquerade as Self-Correction at Small-to-Mid Scale

    cs.CL 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Across 0.8B-12B models plus a frontier arm, apparent self-correction effects are dominated by format-recovery and format-loss artifacts, with near-zero content-level change at capable scale.

  2. The Computational Basis of Confidence in Large Language Models

    cs.LG 2026-07 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Answer-logit differences in multimodal LMs behave as monotonic readouts of a latent decision variable in simple perceptual and memory tasks, but not in complex visual reasoning.

  3. When to Vote, When to Rewrite: Disagreement-Guided Strategy Routing for Test-Time Scaling

    cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    A disagreement-guided routing framework dynamically selects among resolution, voting, and rewriting strategies for test-time scaling, delivering 3-7% accuracy gains with lower sampling cost on mathematical benchmarks.

  4. MMRefine: Unveiling the Obstacles to Robust Refinement in Multimodal Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MMRefine introduces a six-scenario, six-error-type benchmark for multimodal math refinement, and its evaluation of 17 models shows open-source models largely lag closed ones, with spatial reasoning errors the hardest to fix.

  5. Confidence v.s. Critique: A Decomposition of Self-Correction Capability for LLMs

    cs.CL 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The paper proposes confidence and critique metrics for LLM self-correction, finds a trade-off between them under prompting and in-context learning, and introduces a data-format transformation (CCT) that improves both ...

  6. Spectral Origins of the Self-Correction Blind Spot in Autoregressive Generation

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.5 of 10

    Self-correction blind spots in residual-stream autoregressive models arise iff the product of attention Jacobians has spectral radius ≥1, with a sharp marker threshold and RL coupling condition derived from that radius.

  7. DC-Leap: Training-Free Acceleration of dLLMs via Draft-Guided Contiguous Leaping Decoding

    cs.AI 2026-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    DC-Leap accelerates diffusion LLM decoding by verifying contiguous token spans at a lower confidence threshold and using high-confidence future drafts as look-ahead context, achieving up to 53x speedup with comparable...

  8. Not All Errors Are Created Equal: ASCoT Addresses Late-Stage Fragility in Efficient LLM Reasoning

    cs.CL 2025-08 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    ASCoT claims later reasoning errors are more harmful than early ones and uses a position-weighted verifier to prune and correct CoT steps, but its key evidence is internally inconsistent.

  9. Understanding the Dark Side of LLMs' Intrinsic Self-Correction

    cs.CL 2024-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Intrinsic self-correction makes state-of-the-art LLMs overturn correct answers across four task types, and simple question repetition or tiny fine-tuning reduces this damage.

  10. Unleashing the True Potential of LLMs: A Feedback-Triggered Self-Correction with Long-Term Multipath Decoding

    cs.AI 2025-09 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A feedback-triggered regeneration method combined with dynamic multipath decoding improves LLM accuracy on math and coding benchmarks compared to prompt-based self-correction.

  11. HAVE: Head-Adaptive Gating and ValuE Calibration for Hallucination Mitigation in Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-09 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    HAVE uses head-adaptive gating and value calibration to build token evidence and fuse it with the LM distribution, yielding modest QA gains over DAGCD.

  12. Meta-Thinking in LLMs via Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning: A Survey

    cs.AI 2025-04 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    The paper surveys existing work on LLM meta-thinking and argues that multi-agent reinforcement learning is a promising missing ingredient for building self-correcting language models.

  13. A Data-Centric Approach for Safe and Secure Large Language Models against Threatening and Toxic Content

    cs.CR 2025-04 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    A BART-based post-generation corrector lowers toxicity and jailbreaking scores, but the reported gains are partly in-sample because thresholds are optimized on the evaluation data.

  14. Transport properties of baryon rich back-reacted thermal plasma with finite 't Hooft coupling correction

    hep-th 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 3.0 of 10

    In a charged AdS black hole with Gauss-Bonnet and string-cloud corrections, drag force and jet quenching rise with GB coupling and baryon/flavor density while screening length falls; rotating-quark energy loss is supp...

  15. Large Language Models for Planning: A Comprehensive and Systematic Survey

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A structured survey of LLM planning methods, benchmarks, and interpretability work, organized around a three-way taxonomy.

  16. Generative AI Act II: Test Time Scaling Drives Cognition Engineering

    cs.CL 2025-04 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    Test-time scaling techniques such as long chain-of-thought, tree search, and self-correction define the paper's 'cognition engineering' paradigm, which it surveys, taxonomizes, and tutorials.

Pith tools