arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2602.05073cs.AI
收藏

大语言模型代理中的不确定性量化:基础、新兴挑战与机遇

Uncertainty Quantification in LLM Agents: Foundations, Emerging Challenges, and Opportunities

University of Wisconsin–Madison(威斯康星大学麦迪逊分校);Carnegie Mellon University(卡内基梅隆大学);Nanyang Technological University(南洋理工大学);University of Pennsylvania(宾夕法尼亚大学);University of Southern California(南加州大学);University of California, Berkeley(加州大学伯克利分校)

Changdae Oh, Seongheon Park, To Eun Kim, Jiatong Li, Wendi Li, Samuel Yeh, Xuefeng Du, Hamed Hassani, Paul Bogdan, Dawn Song, Sharon Li

AI总结:

本文探讨了大语言模型代理中不确定性量化的基础、挑战及未来方向,提出新的框架并分析了现实场景中的技术难题。

摘要:

大语言模型(LLM)中的不确定性量化(UQ)是日常应用安全防护的关键组成部分。然而,尽管LLM代理越来越多地应用于高度复杂任务,大多数UQ研究仍集中在单轮问答上。本文认为UQ研究必须转向具有交互代理的现实场景,并提出新的原则性框架。本文提出了三个支柱:(1)基础:首次提出了代理UQ的一般性公式,涵盖现有UQ设置的广泛类别;(2)挑战:识别了四个与代理设置特定相关的技术挑战——不确定性估计器的选择、异质实体的不确定性、交互系统中不确定性动态建模以及缺乏细粒度基准测试;(3)未来方向:总结了代理UQ的实践意义和剩余开放问题,为未来探索提供前瞻性讨论。

英文摘要:

Uncertainty quantification (UQ) for large language models (LLMs) is a key building block for safety guardrails of daily LLM applications. Yet, even as LLM agents are increasingly deployed in highly complex tasks, most UQ research still centers on single-turn question-answering. We argue that UQ research must shift to realistic settings with interactive agents, and that a new principled framework for agent UQ is needed. This paper presents three pillars to build a solid ground for future agent UQ research: (1. Foundations) We present the first general formulation of agent UQ that subsumes broad classes of existing UQ setups; (2. Challenges) We identify four technical challenges specifically tied to agentic setups -- selection of uncertainty estimator, uncertainty of heterogeneous entities, modeling uncertainty dynamics in interactive systems, and lack of fine-grained benchmarks -- with numerical analysis on a real-world agent benchmark, $τ^2$-bench; (3. Future Directions) We conclude with noting on the practical implications of agent UQ and remaining open problems as forward-looking discussion for future explorations.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑