Fetching the paper…
Reading the bibliography…
In line with the principle of honesty, there has been a growing effort to train large language models (LLMs) to generate outputs containing epistemic markers.
A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales
Jacob Cohen. 1960 · 1960
Earlier work this paper cites.
Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts
George Lakoff. 1973 · 1973
Earlier work this paper cites.
An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers
J Richard Landis and Gary G Koch. 1977 · 1977
Earlier work this paper cites.
The many meanings of uncertainty in illness: Toward a systematic accounting
Austin S Babrow, Chris R Kasch, and Leigh A Ford. 1998 · 1998
Earlier work this paper cites.
Communication in the management of uncertainty: The case of persons living with hiv or aids
Dale E Brashers, Judith L Neidig, Stephen M Haas, Linda K Dobbs, Linda W Cardillo, and Jane A Russell. 2000 · 2000
Earlier work this paper cites.
Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse
Ken Hyland. 2005 · 2005
Earlier work this paper cites.
Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic
Mary L McHugh. 2012 · 2012
Earlier work this paper cites.
Disciplinary discourses: Writer stance in research articles
Ken Hyland. 2014 · 2014
Earlier work this paper cites.
Triviaqa: A large scale distantly supervised challenge dataset for reading comprehension
Mandar Joshi, Eunsol Choi, Daniel S Weld, and Luke Zettlemoyer. 2017 · 2017
Earlier work this paper cites.
Natural questions: a benchmark for question answering research
Tom Kwiatkowski, Jennimaria Palomaki, Olivia Redfield, Michael Collins, Ankur Parikh, Chris Alberti, Danielle Epstein, Illia Polosukhin, Jacob Devlin, Kenton Lee, et al. 2019 · 2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
Explanation in artificial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences
Tim Miller. 2019 · 2019
Earlier work this paper cites.
A general language assistant as a laboratory for alignment
Amanda Askell, Yuntao Bai, Anna Chen, Dawn Drain, Deep Ganguli, Tom Henighan, Andy Jones, Nicholas Joseph, Ben Mann, Nova DasSarma, et al. 2021 · 2021
Earlier work this paper cites.
Truthful ai: Developing and governing ai that does not lie
Owain Evans, Owen Cotton-Barratt, Lukas Finnveden, Adam Bales, Avital Balwit, Peter Wills, Luca Righetti, and William Saunders. 2021 · 2021
Earlier work this paper cites.
Language models (mostly) know what they know
Saurav Kadavath, Tom Conerly, Amanda Askell, Tom Henighan, Dawn Drain, Ethan Perez, Nicholas Schiefer, Zac Hatfield-Dodds, Nova DasSarma, Eli Tran-Johnson, et al. 2022 · 2022
Earlier work this paper cites.
Teaching models to express their uncertainty in words
Stephanie Lin, Jacob Hilton, and Owain Evans. 2022 · 2022
Earlier work this paper cites.
Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models
Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, Fei Xia, Ed Chi, Quoc V Le, Denny Zhou, et al. 2022 · 2022
Earlier work this paper cites.
Josh Achiam, Steven Adler, Sandhini Agarwal, Lama Ahmad, Ilge Akkaya, Florencia Leoni Aleman, Diogo Almeida, Janko Altenschmidt, Sam Altman, Shyamal Anadkat, et al. 2023 · 2023
Earlier work this paper cites.
Anya Belz, Craig Thomson, Ehud Reiter, Gavin Abercrombie, Jose M Alonso-Moral, Mohammad Arvan, Anouck Braggaar, Mark Cieliebak, Elizabeth Clark, Kees van Deemter, et al. 2023 · 2023
Earlier work this paper cites.
Breaking common sense: Whoops! a vision-and-language benchmark of synthetic and compositional images
Nitzan Bitton-Guetta, Yonatan Bitton, Jack Hessel, Ludwig Schmidt, Yuval Elovici, Gabriel Stanovsky, and Roy Schwartz. 2023 · 2023
Earlier work this paper cites.
Can large language models be an alternative to human evaluations?
Cheng-Han Chiang and Hung-yi Lee. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
A diachronic perspective on user trust in ai under uncertainty
Shehzaad Dhuliawala, Vilém Zouhar, Mennatallah El-Assady, and Mrinmaya Sachan. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Shifting attention to relevance: Towards the uncertainty estimation of large language models
Jinhao Duan, Hao Cheng, Shiqi Wang, Chenan Wang, Alex Zavalny, Renjing Xu, Bhavya Kailkhura, and Kaidi Xu. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Llm-blender: Ensembling large language models with pairwise ranking and generative fusion
Dongfu Jiang, Xiang Ren, and Bill Yuchen Lin. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Challenges and applications of large language models
Jean Kaddour, Joshua Harris, Maximilian Mozes, Herbie Bradley, Roberta Raileanu, and Robert McHardy. 2023 · 2023
Judgelm: Fine-tuned large language models are scalable judges
Lianghui Zhu, Xinggang Wang, and Xinlong Wang. 2023 · 2023
Later among the works it cites.
Mars: Meaning-aware response scoring for uncertainty estimation in generative llms
Yavuz Faruk Bakman, Duygu Nur Yaldiz, Baturalp Buyukates, Chenyang Tao, Dimitrios Dimitriadis, and Salman Avestimehr. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
A survey on evaluation of large language models
Yupeng Chang, Xu Wang, Jindong Wang, Yuan Wu, Linyi Yang, Kaijie Zhu, Hao Chen, Xiaoyuan Yi, Cunxiang Wang, Yidong Wang, et al. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Abhimanyu Dubey, Abhinav Jauhri, Abhinav Pandey, Abhishek Kadian, Ahmad Al-Dahle, Aiesha Letman, Akhil Mathur, Alan Schelten, Amy Yang, Angela Fan, et al. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Alpacafarm: A simulation framework for methods that learn from human feedback
alphaXiv searches the wider corpus for related work and actual follow-ups.
alphaXiv is searching for related work…
Cited alongside, same era.
Evaluating open-domain question answering in the era of large language models
Ehsan Kamalloo, Nouha Dziri, Charles Clarke, and Davood Rafiei. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Benchmarking cognitive biases in large language models as evaluators
Ryan Koo, Minhwa Lee, Vipul Raheja, Jong Inn Park, Zae Myung Kim, and Dongyeop Kang. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Generating with confidence: Uncertainty quantification for black-box large language models
Zhen Lin, Shubhendu Trivedi, and Jimeng Sun. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Cognitive dissonance: Why do language model outputs disagree with internal representations of truthfulness?
Kevin Liu, Stephen Casper, Dylan Hadfield-Menell, and Jacob Andreas. 2023a · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
G-eval: Nlg evaluation using gpt-4 with better human alignment
Yang Liu, Dan Iter, Yichong Xu, Shuohang Wang, Ruochen Xu, and Chenguang Zhu. 2023b · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Gpt-3.5 turbo
OpenAI. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Automated annotation with generative ai requires validation
Nicholas Pangakis, Samuel Wolken, and Neil Fasching. 2023 · 2023
Cited alongside, same era.
Yann Dubois, Chen Xuechen Li, Rohan Taori, Tianyi Zhang, Ishaan Gulrajani, Jimmy Ba, Carlos Guestrin, Percy S Liang, and Tatsunori B Hashimoto. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Opera: Alleviating hallucination in multi-modal large language models via over-trust penalty and retrospection-allocation
Qidong Huang, Xiaoyi Dong, Pan Zhang, Bin Wang, Conghui He, Jiaqi Wang, Dahua Lin, Weiming Zhang, and Nenghai Yu. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Lifetox: Unveiling implicit toxicity in life advice
Minbeom Kim, Jahyun Koo, Hwanhee Lee, Joonsuk Park, Hwaran Lee, and Kyomin Jung. 2024a · 2024
Closest in time.
Vlind-bench: Measuring language priors in large vision-language models
Kang-il Lee, Minbeom Kim, Seunghyun Yoon, Minsung Kim, Dongryeol Lee, Hyukhun Koh, and Kyomin Jung. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Visual instruction tuning
Haotian Liu, Chunyuan Li, Qingyang Wu, and Yong Jae Lee. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Llm comparative assessment: Zero-shot nlg evaluation through pairwise comparisons using large language models
Adian Liusie, Potsawee Manakul, and Mark Gales. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Mitigating hallucinations in large vision-language models via summary-guided decoding
Kyungmin Min, Minbeom Kim, Kang-il Lee, Dongryeol Lee, and Kyomin Jung. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Hello gpt-4o
OpenAI. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Ai deception: A survey of examples, risks, and potential solutions
Peter S Park, Simon Goldstein, Aidan O’Gara, Michael Chen, and Dan Hendrycks. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Is llm-as-a-judge robust? investigating universal adversarial attacks on zero-shot llm assessment
Vyas Raina, Adian Liusie, and Mark Gales. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Judging the judges: Evaluating alignment and vulnerabilities in llms-as-judges
Aman Singh Thakur, Kartik Choudhary, Venkat Srinik Ramayapally, Sankaran Vaidyanathan, and Dieuwke Hupkes. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Evaluating open-qa evaluation
Cunxiang Wang, Sirui Cheng, Qipeng Guo, Yuanhao Yue, Bowen Ding, Zhikun Xu, Yidong Wang, Xiangkun Hu, Zheng Zhang, and Yue Zhang. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Relying on the unreliable: The impact of language models’ reluctance to express uncertainty
Kaitlyn Zhou, Jena D Hwang, Xiang Ren, and Maarten Sap. 2024 · 2024
Closest in time.
Llms can be easily confused by instructional distractions
Yerin Hwang, Yongil Kim, Jahyun Koo, Taegwan Kang, Hyunkyung Bae, and Kyomin Jung. 2025 · 2025
Closest in time.
Return of EM: Entity-driven answer set expansion for QA evaluation
Dongryeol Lee, Minwoo Lee, Kyungmin Min, Joonsuk Park, and Kyomin Jung. 2025 · 2025
Closest in time.