✳flâneur — a map of the web's best reading

Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations

arxiv.org · 11,313 words · saved by 1 readers

This is experimental HTML to improve accessibility. We invite you to report rendering errors. Use Alt+Y to toggle on accessible reporting links and Alt+Shift+Y to toggle off. Learn more about this project and help improve conversions. \ul In many critical machine learning (ML) 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 ex

\useunder \ul Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations Evan Becker Department of Computer Science UCLA evbecker@ucla.edu &Stefano Soatto Department of Computer Science UCLA soatto@cs.ucla.edu (October 16, 2025) Abstract In many critical machine learning (ML) 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

Explore this link on the map →

Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations

related reading