PreprintCited by 2Topic ModelingAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningNatural Language Processing Techniques

Learning to Route LLMs with Confidence Tokens

Open access
Chuang, Yu-Neng, Sarma, Prathusha Kameswara, Gopalan, Parikshit, Boccio, John, Bolouki, Sara, Hu, Xia, Zhou, Helen·2024·arXiv

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive performance on several tasks and are increasingly deployed in real-world applications. However, especially in high-stakes settings, it becomes vital to know when the output of an LLM may be unreliable. Depending on whether an answer is trustworthy, a system can then choose to route the question to another expert, or otherwise fall back on a safe default behavior. In this work, we study the extent to which LLMs can reliably indicate confidence in their answers, and how this notion of confidence can translate into downstream accuracy gains. We propose Self-Reflection with Error-based Feedback (Self-REF), a lightweight training strategy to teach LLMs to express confidence in whether their answers are correct in a reliable manner. Self-REF introduces confidence tokens into the LLM, from which a confidence score can be extracted. Compared to conventional approaches such as verbalizing confidence and examining token probabilities, we demonstrate empirically that confidence tokens show significant improvements in downstream routing and rejection learning tasks.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2410.13284

Cites

2 of 2 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.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Self-Ref decreases the latency of LLM inference by ensuring only uncertain or incorrect outputs trigger routing to more capable LLMs.

    “This ensures that only uncertain or incorrect outputs trigger routing to more capable LLMs, which decreases the latency of LLM inference.”

    From Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models (2025) · cites this paper as [25]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Stop Overthinking: A Survey on Efficient Reasoning for Large Language Models

    Sui, Y., Chuang, Y.-N., Wang, G., Zhang, J., Zhang, T., Yuan, J., Liu, H., Wen, A., Zhong, S., Zou, N., et al. (2025) · arXiv · Cited by 2 · see citing works

    “Prompt-Guided e.g. Token-Budget [34]; Chain of Draft [99]; Token Complexity [43]; Concise Chain-of-Thought (CCoT) [69]; MARP [8]; Routing by e.g. Claude 3.7 Sonnet [2]; SoT [4]; Self-REF [17]; Confident [14]; RouteLLM [64];”
    InfluentialSelf-citation
  • A Unified Approach to Routing and Cascading for LLMs

    Dekoninck, J., Baader, M., & Vechev, M. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.10347

    “One of the most common applications of routing is model selection for natural language input queries with a known answer (Chuang et al., 2024; Ding et al., 2024; Hari & Thomson, 2023; Liu et al., 2024; Jang et al., 2023; Nguyen et al., 2024; Sakota et al., 2024; Shnitzer et al., 2023).”

Authors
Chuang, Y.-N., Sarma, P. K., Gopalan, P., Boccio, J., Bolouki, S., Hu, X., & Zhou, H.
Affiliations
  • Rice University (US)
  • Apple (United States) (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4403579452
Cited by
0
References
2
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
large language models, confidence estimation, answer reliability, question routing, self-reflection

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