arXiv (All)
open access
Are You Sure Your LLM Is Sure? Repairing and Auditing Confidence
Confidence scores determine whether an LLM answer is accepted, reviewed, or regenerated, yet scalar recalibration can only correct errors visible through the score itself. We introduce RADAR (Repair, Adopt, and Diagnose After Recalibration), a reliability framework that separates confidence repair f
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- FLARE: Fine-Grained Diagnostic Feedback for LLM Code Refinement#1011122
- DataShield: Uncovering Risky Fine-Tuning Data Across LLMs Through Consensus Subspace Alignment#373322
- Critic Experience Bank: Self-Evolving Step-Level Confidence Estimation for LLM Agents#1216361
- Does Fault Localization Beat a Fresh Attempt? A Placebo-Controlled Study of Test-Guided Code Repair#627754
- WS-Reliability v1.1 (2004-11-01)#600982
Record · ID 1357794
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive