Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Calibration, Not Answer Selection: Distilling Internal Confidence in Reasoning Models

Reinforcement learning with binary correctness rewards trains correctness, not calibrated confidence. The confidence that reasoning models verbalize is systematically overconfident, and the problem is not merely one of scale: verbalized confidence tracks how willing a model is to commit to an answer, not how likely the answer is to be right. Post-hoc rescaling therefore fits one distribution but rarely transfers. We look inside the model instead. On factual question answering, a linear probe on the hidden state between the chain of thought and the answer is substantially better calibrated: its expected calibration error is 5 to 38 times lower than that of the verbalized score across four ...

AuthorsYadong Xi, Rongsheng Zhang, Tangjie Lv et al.
Primary categorycs.CL
Published27 September 2026
Last updated at source27 September 2026
cs.CL
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/b479c6e1-851f-490f-8396-872f587bf5c7" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.