Large language models (LLMs) exhibit impressive performance across diverse tasks but often struggle to accurately gauge their knowledge boundaries, leading to confident yet incorrect responses. This paper explores leveraging LLMs’ internal states to enhance their perception of knowledge boundaries from efficiency and risk perspectives. We investigate whether LLMs can estimate their confidence using internal states before response generation, potentially saving computational resources. Our experiments on datasets like Natural Questions, HotpotQA, and MMLU reveal that LLMs demonstrate significant pre-generation perception, which is further refined post-generation, with perception gaps remaining stable across varying conditions. To mitigate risks in critical domains, we introduce Consistency-based Confidence Calibration (C³), which assesses confidence consistency through question reformulation. C³ significantly improves LLMs’ ability to recognize their knowledge gaps, enhancing the unknown perception rate by 5.6% on NQ and 4.9% on HotpotQA. Our findings suggest that pre-generation confidence estimation can optimize efficiency, while C³ effectively controls output risks, advancing the reliability of LLMs in practical applications.

Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) demonstrate strong visual question answering (VQA) capabilities but are shown to hallucinate. A reliable model should perceive its knowledge boundaries—knowing what it knows and what it does not. This paper investigates LVLMs’ perception of their knowledge boundaries by evaluating three types of confidence signals: probabilistic confidence, answer consistency-based confidence, and verbalized confidence. Experiments on three LVLMs across three VQA datasets show that, although LVLMs possess a reasonable perception level, there is substantial room for improvement. Among the three confidence, probabilistic and consistency-based signals are more reliable indicators, while verbalized confidence often leads to overconfidence. To enhance LVLMs’ perception, we adapt several established confidence calibration methods from Large Language Models (LLMs) and propose three effective methods. Additionally, we compare LVLMs with their LLM counterparts, finding that jointly processing visual and textual inputs decreases question-answering performance but reduces confidence, resulting in improved perception level compared to LLMs.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been found to have difficulty knowing they do not possess certain knowledge and tend to provide specious answers in such cases. Retrieval Augmentation (RA) has been extensively studied to mitigate LLMs’ hallucinations. However, due to the extra overhead and unassured quality of retrieval, it may not be optimal to conduct RA all the time. A straightforward idea is to only conduct retrieval when LLMs are uncertain about a question. This motivates us to enhance the LLMs’ ability to perceive their knowledge boundaries to help RA. In this paper, we first quantitatively measure LLMs’ such ability and confirm their overconfidence. Then, we study how LLMs’ certainty about a question correlates with their dependence on external retrieved information. We propose several methods to enhance LLMs’ perception of knowledge boundaries and show that they are effective in reducing overconfidence. Additionally, equipped with these methods, LLMs can achieve comparable or even better performance of RA with much fewer retrieval calls.