跳到正文
arXiv cs.AI· Arijit Dey, Bhartendu Kumar, Ramya Hebbalaguppe, Khuushi Maheshwari·· 2 天前AI 评分22

RADAR:修复、采纳与审计 LLM 置信度

Are You Sure Your LLM Is Sure? Repairing and Auditing Confidence

AI 导读

针对 LLM 置信度分数校准问题,研究者提出可靠性框架 RADAR,将置信度修复与是否采纳修复、审计残余错误分离。其修复方法 PAIC 从未标注目标提示词的正确性探针预测中学习单调映射,在 47,400 次重放原始分数分配中,配对投注在 42.95% 的分配里采纳了留出测试风险更低的候选,而单侧经验 Bernstein 仅为 15.09%。

正文 · 原文

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Confidence scores determine whether an LLM answer is accepted, reviewed, or regenerated, yet scalar recalibration can only correct errors visible through the score itself. We introduce RADAR (Repair, Adopt, and Diagnose After Recalibration), a reliability framework that separates confidence repair from deciding whether to deploy the repair and auditing the errors that remain. Under squared loss, we decompose prediction risk into outcome noise, information hidden by the score, and mapping error; restricting repair to order-preserving maps additionally introduces a pooling gap. For repair, we propose Probe-Anchored Isotonic Calibration (PAIC), which learns a monotone map from correctness-probe predictions on unlabeled target prompts. PAIC's excess risk depends on the probe's score-conditional bias and fitting error rather than its overall accuracy. For adoption, we derive a paired procedure with finite-sample control of false improvements. For auditing, we develop a prompt-clustered kernel test that detects feature-aligned residual errors while accounting for dependent answers from the same prompt. Across multiple LLM checkpoints, benchmarks, and distribution shifts, richer predictors can improve confidence estimation, but projecting their information back to a scalar score can lose these gains, and lower prediction risk need not yield better review decisions. Across 47,400 replayed raw-score allocations, paired betting adopts candidates with lower held-out test risk in 42.95% of allocations, versus 15.09% for one-sided empirical Bernstein. RADAR thus provides a principled workflow to repair what a scalar score can express, adopt a repair only when supported by evidence, and diagnose systematic errors that recalibration leaves behind. Code and data will be released upon acceptance.
Comments: main paper 10 pages; supplementary 44 pages; 5 figures
Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as: arXiv:2610.22139 [cs.AI]
  (or arXiv:2610.22139v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.22139

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Ramya Hebbalaguppe [view email]
[v1] Thu, 15 Oct 2026 16:12:29 UTC (198 KB)

来源:arXiv cs.AI · arxiv.org