Cited by 81Speech and dialogue systemsNatural Language Processing TechniquesIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

Reducing Conversational Agents’ Overconfidence Through Linguistic Calibration

Open access
Mielke, Sabrina J., Szlam, Arthur, Dinan, Emily, Boureau, Y-Lan·2022·Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Abstract

While improving neural dialogue agents’ factual accuracy is the object of much research, another important aspect of communication, less studied in the setting of neural dialogue, is transparency about ignorance. In this work, we analyze to what extent state-of-the-art chit-chat models are linguistically calibrated in the sense that their verbalized expression of doubt (or confidence) matches the likelihood that the model’s responses are factually incorrect (or correct). We find that these models are poorly calibrated, yet we show that likelihood of correctness can accurately be predicted. By incorporating such metacognitive features into the training of a controllable generation model, we obtain a dialogue agent with greatly improved linguistic calibration.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/tacl_a_00494

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mielke, S. J., Szlam, A., Dinan, E., & Boureau, Y.-L.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Meta (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
  • Mielke, Sabrina J.
  • Szlam, Arthur
  • Dinan, Emily
  • Boureau, Y-Lan
Venue
Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2022
Volume
10
Pages
857-872
ISSN
2307-387X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4290994954
Cited by
72
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 3
FWCI
4.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Keywords
chatbots, overconfidence, metacognition, factual accuracy, controllable generation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review