🤖 AI Summary
This study investigates the reliability of self-assessed confidence in language models of varying scales on question-answering (QA) tasks. By employing multiple self-evaluation methods and conducting systematic comparative experiments across cross-domain QA benchmarks, we comprehensively assess the uncertainty quantification capabilities of different-sized models over diverse knowledge domains. Our results demonstrate that the reliability of self-assessed confidence is independent of both model scale and absolute accuracy; despite lower overall performance, smaller models yield consistently reliable confidence signals. These findings challenge the prevailing assumption that only large-scale models possess robust self-awareness. Consequently, this work provides a critical theoretical foundation for the efficient deployment of lightweight yet trustworthy models in resource-constrained scenarios.
📝 Abstract
This study systematically evaluates self-evaluation-based uncertainty quantification across different language models of varying sizes on question-answering tasks spanning general to specialized knowledge domains. Using various self-evaluation methods where models judge their own predictions, we examine how model scale and domain specificity affect the quality of self-assessed confidence signals. Our results reveal that while accuracy predictably declines with smaller models and more specialized domains, the reliability of self-evaluated confidence remains largely stable across both dimensions. This independence means the most capable model is not necessarily the best at self-assessing prediction reliability. These findings suggest that smaller models can achieve reasonable self-assessed confidence despite lower accuracy, making them viable for resource-constrained deployments.