University of California Irvine: What Large Language Models Know and What People Think They Know
The study reveals that users tend to overestimate large language models' accuracy due to discrepancies between the models' internal confidence and the users' interpretation, with longer explanations and specific uncertainty language boosting user confidence regardless of actual accuracy. Tailoring LLM responses to better reflect internal uncertainty can help bridge this calibration gap, improving trustworthiness in AI-assisted decisions.
University of California Irvine: What Large Language Models Know and What People Think They Know
Summary of Read Full Report
This study investigates how well large language models (LLMs) communicate their uncertainty to users and how human perception aligns with the LLMs' actual confidence. The research identifies a "calibration gap" where users overestimate LLM accuracy, especially with default explanations.
Longer explanations increase user confidence without improving accuracy, indicating shallow processing. By tailoring explanations to reflect the LLM's internal confidence, the study demonstrates a reduction in both the calibration and discrimination gaps, leading to improved user perception of LLM reliability.
The study underscores the importance of transparent uncertainty communication for trustworthy AI-assisted decision-making, advocating for explanations aligned with model confidence.
The study examines how well large language models (LLMs) communicate uncertainty and how humans perceive the accuracy of LLM responses. It identifies gaps between LLM confidence and human confidence, and explores methods to improve user perception of LLM accuracy.
Here are 5 key takeaways:
- Calibration and Discrimination Gaps: There's a notable difference between an LLM's internal confidence in its answers and how confident humans are in those same answers. Humans often overestimate the accuracy of LLM responses, and are not good at distinguishing between correct and incorrect answers based on default explanations.
- Explanation Length Matters: Longer explanations from LLMs tend to increase user confidence, even if the added length doesn't actually improve the accuracy or informativeness of the answer.
- Uncertainty Language Influences Perception: Human confidence is strongly influenced by the type of uncertainty language used in LLM explanations. Low-confidence statements lead to lower human confidence, while high-confidence statements lead to higher human confidence.
- Tailoring Explanations Reduces Gaps: By adjusting LLM explanations to better reflect the model's internal confidence, the calibration and discrimination gaps can be narrowed. This improves user perception of LLM accuracy.
- Limited User Expertise: Participants in the study generally lacked the expertise to accurately assess LLM responses independently. Even when users altered the LLM's answer, their accuracy was lower than the LLM's.
Related Articles
Gemini 3.1 Pro and the Case for Model-Agnostic Agentic Infrastructure
Google's Gemini 3.1 Pro doubled its reasoning benchmarks overnight. Here's why that makes model-agnostic agentic infrastructure more critical than ever.
Google Gemini 3.1 Pro, ChatGPT Ads, and Why Organizations Need to Own Their AI Infrastructure
Google launches Gemini 3.1 Pro with advanced reasoning while OpenAI rolls out ads in ChatGPT. These two moves reveal a growing tension in enterprise AI: who controls the intelligence layer, and whose interests does it serve?
ChatGPT Now Has Ads — And It Should Change How You Think About AI Infrastructure
OpenAI has started showing ads inside ChatGPT responses. This marks a turning point: organizations relying on consumer AI tools are now subject to someone else's monetization strategy. Here's why owning your AI infrastructure matters more than ever.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Just Dropped — Here's What It Means for Organizations Running Their Own AI
Google's Gemini 3.1 Pro launched today with 1M-token context, native multimodal reasoning, and agentic tool use. Here's why model releases like this one matter most to organizations that own their AI infrastructure — and why locking into a single provider is the costliest mistake you can make.
See the ibl.ai AI Operating System in Action
Discover how leading universities and organizations are transforming education with the ibl.ai AI Operating System. Explore real-world implementations from Harvard, MIT, Stanford, and users from 400+ institutions worldwide.
View Case StudiesGet Started with ibl.ai
Choose the plan that fits your needs and start transforming your educational experience today.