Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations
<|reference_start|>Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations: In many high-risk machine learning applications it is essential for a model to indicate when it is uncertain about a prediction. While large language models (LLMs) can reach and even surpass human-level accuracy on a variety of benchmarks, their overconfidence in incorrect responses is still a well-documented failure mode. Traditional methods for ML uncertainty quantification can be difficult to directly adapt to LLMs due to the computational cost of implementation and closed-source nature of many models. A variety of black-box methods have recently been proposed, but these often rely on heuristics such as self-verbalized confidence. We instead propose a framework for measuring an LLM's uncertainty with respect to the distribution of generated explanations for an answer. While utilizing explanations is not a new idea in and of itself, by interpreting each possible model+explanation pair as a test-time classifier we can calculate a posterior answer distribution over the most likely of these classifiers. We demonstrate how a specific instance of this framework using explanation entailment as our classifier likelihood improves confidence score metrics (in particular AURC and AUROC) over baselines across five different datasets. We believe these results indicate that our framework is both a well-principled and effective way of quantifying uncertainty in LLMs.<|reference_end|>
@article{becker2024cycles,
    title={Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations},
    author={Evan Becker, Stefano Soatto},
    journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.03441},
    year={2024},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    eprint={2406.03441},
    primaryClass={cs.CL cs.LG}
}