BAS: A Decision-Theoretic Approach to Evaluating Large Language Model Confidence
Large language models (LLMs) often produce confident but incorrect answers in settings where abstention would be safer. Standard evaluation protocols, however, require a response and do not account for how confidence should guide decisions under different risk preferences. To address this gap, we introduce the Behavioral Alignment Score (BAS), a decision-theoretic metric for evaluating how well LLM confidence supports abstention-aware decision making. BAS is derived from an explicit answer-or-abstain utility model and aggregates realized utility across a continuum of risk thresholds, yielding a measure of decision-level reliability that depends on both the magnitude and ordering of confidence. We show theoretically that truthful confidence estimates uniquely maximize expected BAS utility, linking calibration to decision-optimal behavior. BAS is related to proper scoring rules such as log loss, but differs structurally: log loss penalizes underconfidence and overconfidence symmetrically, whereas BAS imposes an asymmetric penalty that strongly prioritizes avoiding overconfident errors. Using BAS alongside widely used metrics such as ECE and AURC, we then construct a benchmark of self-reported confidence reliability across multiple LLMs and tasks. Our results reveal substantial variation in decision-useful confidence, and while larger and more accurate models tend to achieve higher BAS, even frontier models remain prone to severe overconfidence. Importantly, models with similar ECE or AURC can exhibit very different BAS due to highly overconfident errors, highlighting limitations of standard metrics. We further show that simple interventions, such as top-$k$ confidence elicitation and post-hoc calibration, can meaningfully improve confidence reliability. Overall, our work provides both a principled metric and a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating LLM confidence reliability.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Tasks
Decision MakingSimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Beyond Accuracy: How AI Metacognitive Sensitivity improves AI-assisted Decision Making
In settings where human decision-making relies on AI input, both the predictive accuracy of the AI system and the reliability of its confidence estimates influence decision quality. We highlight the role of AI metacognit…
Decision MakingDefining and Evaluating Decision and Composite Risk in Language Models Applied to Natural Language Inference
Despite their impressive performance, large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT are known to pose important risks. One such set of risks arises from misplaced confidence, whether over-confidence or under-confidence, t…
Language ModellingNatural Language InferenceTextBandit: Evaluating Probabilistic Reasoning in LLMs Through Language-Only Decision Tasks
Large language models (LLMs) have shown to be increasingly capable of performing reasoning tasks, but their ability to make sequential decisions under uncertainty only using natural language remains underexplored. We int…
Calibration Is Not Enough: Evaluating Confidence Estimation Under Language Variations
Confidence estimation (CE) indicates how reliable the answers of large language models are and impacts user trust and decision-making. Existing evaluations mainly concern the alignment between confidence and correctness,…
Can Confidence Estimates Decide When Chain-of-Thought Is Necessary for LLMs?
Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting is a common technique for improving the reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs). However, extended reasoning is often unnecessary and substantially increases token usage. As s…