Systematic Evaluation of Uncertainty Estimation Methods in Large Language Models
By: Christian Hobelsberger , Theresa Winner , Andreas Nawroth and more
Potential Business Impact:
Helps computers know when they are wrong.
Large language models (LLMs) produce outputs with varying levels of uncertainty, and, just as often, varying levels of correctness; making their practical reliability far from guaranteed. To quantify this uncertainty, we systematically evaluate four approaches for confidence estimation in LLM outputs: VCE, MSP, Sample Consistency, and CoCoA (Vashurin et al., 2025). For the evaluation of the approaches, we conduct experiments on four question-answering tasks using a state-of-the-art open-source LLM. Our results show that each uncertainty metric captures a different facet of model confidence and that the hybrid CoCoA approach yields the best reliability overall, improving both calibration and discrimination of correct answers. We discuss the trade-offs of each method and provide recommendations for selecting uncertainty measures in LLM applications.
Similar Papers
A Survey of Uncertainty Estimation Methods on Large Language Models
Computation and Language
Helps AI tell when it's making things up.
Revisiting Uncertainty Estimation and Calibration of Large Language Models
Computation and Language
Helps AI know when it's unsure.
Measuring Aleatoric and Epistemic Uncertainty in LLMs: Empirical Evaluation on ID and OOD QA Tasks
Computation and Language
Helps computers know when they are unsure.