Uncertainty Quantification of Large Language Models through Multi-Dimensional Responses

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across various tasks due to large training datasets and powerful transformer architecture. However, the reliability of responses from LLMs remains a question. Uncertainty quantification (UQ) of LLMs is crucial for ensuring their reliability, especially in areas such as healthcare, finance, and decision-making. Existing UQ methods primarily focus on semantic similarity, overlooking the deeper knowledge dimensions embedded in responses. We introduce a multi-dimensional UQ framework that integrates semantic and knowledge-aware similarity analysis. By generating multiple responses and leveraging auxiliary LLMs to extract implicit knowledge, we construct separate similarity matrices and apply tensor decomposition to derive a comprehensive uncertainty representation. This approach disentangles overlapping information from both semantic and knowledge dimensions, capturing both semantic variations and factual consistency, leading to more accurate UQ. Our empirical evaluations demonstrate that our method outperforms existing techniques in identifying uncertain responses, offering a more robust framework for enhancing LLM reliability in high-stakes applications.

Understanding the Uncertainty of LLM Explanations: A Perspective Based on Reasoning Topology

Understanding the uncertainty in large language model (LLM) explanations is important for evaluating their faithfulness and reasoning consistency, and thus provides insights into the reliability of LLM's output regarding a question. In this work, we propose a novel framework that quantifies uncertainty in LLM explanations through a reasoning topology perspective. By designing a structural elicitation strategy, we guide the LLMs to frame the explanations of an answer into a graph topology. This process decomposes the explanations into the knowledge related sub-questions and topology-based reasoning structures, which allows us to quantify uncertainty not only at the semantic level but also from the reasoning path. It further brings convenience to assess knowledge redundancy and provide interpretable insights into the reasoning process. Our method offers a systematic way to interpret the LLM reasoning, analyze limitations, and provide guidance for enhancing robustness and faithfulness. This work pioneers the use of graph-structured uncertainty measurement in LLM explanations and demonstrates the potential of topology-based quantification.

MCQA-Eval: Efficient Confidence Evaluation in NLG with Gold-Standard Correctness Labels

Large Language Models (LLMs) require robust confidence estimation, particularly in critical domains like healthcare and law where unreliable outputs can lead to significant consequences. Despite much recent work in confidence estimation, current evaluation frameworks rely on correctness functions -- various heuristics that are often noisy, expensive, and possibly introduce systematic biases. These methodological weaknesses tend to distort evaluation metrics and thus the comparative ranking of confidence measures. We introduce MCQA-Eval, an evaluation framework for assessing confidence measures in Natural Language Generation (NLG) that eliminates dependence on an explicit correctness function by leveraging gold-standard correctness labels from multiple-choice datasets. MCQA-Eval enables systematic comparison of both internal state-based white-box (e.g. logit-based) and consistency-based black-box confidence measures, providing a unified evaluation methodology across different approaches. Through extensive experiments on multiple LLMs and widely used QA datasets, we report that MCQA-Eval provides efficient and more reliable assessments of confidence estimation methods than existing approaches.