ibl.ai Agentic AI Blog

Insights on building and deploying agentic AI systems. Our blog covers AI agent architectures, LLM infrastructure, MCP servers, enterprise deployment strategies, and real-world implementation guides. Whether you are a developer building AI agents, a CTO evaluating agentic platforms, or a technical leader driving AI adoption, you will find practical guidance here.

Topics We Cover

Featured Research and Reports

We analyze key research from leading institutions and labs including Google DeepMind, Anthropic, OpenAI, Meta AI, McKinsey, and the World Economic Forum. Our content includes detailed analysis of reports on AI agents, foundation models, and enterprise AI strategy.

For Technical Leaders

CTOs, engineering leads, and AI architects turn to our blog for guidance on agent orchestration, model evaluation, infrastructure planning, and building production-ready AI systems. We provide frameworks for responsible AI deployment that balance capability with safety and reliability.

Back to Blog

University of California Irvine: What Large Language Models Know and What People Think They Know

Jeremy WeaverFebruary 17, 2025
Premium

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

Shadow AI Is Already Inside Every Government Agency

Unsanctioned AI use is already routine across federal agencies, and in government the exposure is statutory rather than commercial — Privacy Act records sent to commercial providers, federal records generated in systems the agency cannot subpoena, supply-chain restrictions under EO 13873, and mosaic classification spillage. This post maps each exposure to its legal basis and gives the data-classification tiers that decide which workloads need managed cloud, agency-controlled infrastructure, or a fully air-gapped deployment.

ibl.ai EngineeringAugust 4, 2026

The Open-Weight Tipping Point: Two 2-Trillion-Parameter Models

Two models above 2 trillion parameters became available as open weights in a single week: Moonshot's Kimi K3 at 2.8T with a 1M-token context, and Alibaba's Qwen 3.8-Max at 2.4T with 95B active per token. This post does the memory arithmetic on what it actually takes to serve models that size, prices the alternatives, and explains why the durable advantage is model-agnostic infrastructure rather than any single model.

ibl.ai EngineeringAugust 3, 2026

AI Agent Security Is an Infrastructure Problem, Not a Feature

Uber's security lead says securing AI agents is what keeps him up at night, and Google just shipped agent evaluation tooling to production. The tooling layer is maturing; the infrastructure question underneath it is not. This post explains why you cannot fully secure an agent whose reasoning runs on someone else's servers, and gives the five-question perimeter test to run on any agent platform before you sign.

ibl.ai EngineeringAugust 2, 2026

Q2 2026 Earnings: AI Infrastructure Pays — For Whoever Owns It

The quarter ending June 30, 2026 settled the question of whether AI infrastructure pays off: AWS grew 37% to $42.2B, Google Cloud 82% to $24.8B, Azure crossed $100B annualized, and Copilot passed 30 million paid seats. This post does the arithmetic on what those seats cost a 10,000-person enterprise versus token-priced and self-hosted alternatives, and shows where the return actually lands.

ibl.ai EngineeringAugust 1, 2026

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 Studies

Get Started with ibl.ai

Choose the plan that fits your needs and start transforming your educational experience today.