Closing the Confidence-Faithfulness Gap in Large Language Models

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) tend to verbalize confidence scores that are largely detached from their actual accuracy, yet the geometric relationship governing this behavior remain poorly understood. In this work, we present a mechanistic interpretability analysis of verbalized confidence, using linear probes and contrastive activation addition (CAA) steering to show that calibration and verbalized confidence signals are encoded linearly but are orthogonal to one another -- a finding consistent across three open-weight models and four datasets. Interestingly, when models are prompted to simultaneously reason through a problem and verbalize a confidence score, the reasoning process disrupts the verbalized confidence direction, exacerbating miscalibration. We term this the "Reasoning Contamination Effect." Leveraging this insight, we introduce a two-stage adaptive steering pipeline that reads the model's internal accuracy estimate and steers verbalized output to match it, substantially improving calibration alignment across all evaluated models.

Subjects:

Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

Cite as: arXiv:2603.25052 [cs.CL]

(or arXiv:2603.25052v2 [cs.CL] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.25052

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Muqing Miao [view email] [v1] Thu, 26 Mar 2026 05:42:04 UTC (966 KB) [v2] Wed, 1 Apr 2026 05:05:49 UTC (2,145 KB)