A critical component in the trustworthiness of LLMs is reliable uncertainty communication, yet LLMs often use assertive language when conveying false claims, leading to over-reliance and eroded trust. We present the first systematic study of $\textit{faithful confidence calibration}$ of LLMs, benchmarking models' ability to use linguistic expressions of uncertainty that $\textit{faithfully reflect}$ their intrinsic uncertainty, across a comprehensive array of models, datasets, and prompting strategies. Our results demonstrate that LLMs largely fail at this task, and that existing interventions are insufficient: standard prompt approaches provide only marginal gains, and existing, factuality-based calibration techniques can even harm faithful calibration. To address this critical gap, we introduce MetaFaith, a novel prompt-based calibration approach inspired by human metacognition. We show that MetaFaith robustly improves faithful calibration across diverse models and task domains, enabling up to 61% improvement in faithfulness and achieving an 83% win rate over original generations as judged by humans.
MetaFaith: Faithful Natural Language Uncertainty Expression in LLMs
A study reveals that Large Language Models (LLMs) struggle with expressing uncertainty accurately and introduces MetaFaith, a prompt-based method that enhances their calibration significantly.
- Year
- 2025
- Venue
- arXiv 2025
- Authors
- 6
- Hosting
- Abstract onlyARXIV-DEFAULT
Cite
Notes
Only stored in your browser.
Attribution
- Abstract & full text
- arxiv.org/abs/2505.24858ARXIV-DEFAULT
- TL;DR
- Semantic Scholar