Search

Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized the field of natural language processing with their impressive reasoning and question-answering capabilities. However, these models are sometimes prone to generating credible-sounding but incorrect information, a phenomenon known as LLM hallucinations. Reliable uncertainty estimation in LLMs is essential for fostering trust in their generated responses and serves as a critical tool for the detection and prevention of erroneous or hallucinated outputs. To achieve reliable and well-calibrated uncertainty quantification in open-ended and free-form natural language generation, we propose an uncertainty-aware fine-tuning approach for LLMs. This approach enhances the model's ability to provide reliable uncertainty estimates without compromising accuracy, thereby guiding them to produce more trustworthy responses. We introduce a novel uncertainty-aware causal language modeling loss function, grounded in the principles of decision theory. Through rigorous evaluation on multiple free-form question-answering datasets and models, we demonstrate that our uncertainty-aware fine-tuning approach yields better calibrated uncertainty estimates in natural language generation tasks than fine-tuning with the standard causal language modeling loss. Furthermore, the experimental results show that the proposed method significantly improves the model's ability to detect hallucinations and identify out-of-domain prompts.

Reasoning with preconditions such as "glass can be used for drinking water unless the glass is shattered" remains an open problem for language models. The main challenge lies in the scarcity of preconditions data and the model's lack of support for such reasoning. We present PInKS, Preconditioned Commonsense Inference with WeaK Supervision, an improved model for reasoning with preconditions through minimum supervision. We show, both empirically and theoretically, that PInKS improves the results on benchmarks focused on reasoning with the preconditions of commonsense knowledge (up to 40% Macro-F1 scores). We further investigate PInKS through PAC-Bayesian informativeness analysis, precision measures, and ablation study., Comment: AACL 2022