Can LLMs Recognize Their Own Analogical Hallucinations? Evaluating Uncertainty Estimation for Analogical Reasoning

Large language models (LLMs) often demonstrate strong performance by leveraging implicit knowledge acquired during pretraining.Analogical reasoning, which solves new problems by referencing similar known examples, offers a structured way to utilize this knowledge, but can also lead to subtle factual errors and hallucinations.In this work, we investigate whether LLMs can recognize the reliability of their own analogical outputs using black-box uncertainty estimation (UE).We evaluate six UE metrics across two reasoningintensive tasks: mathematical problem solving and code generation.Our results show that Kernel Language Entropy (KLE) and Lexical Similarity (LexSim) are the most robust indicators of correctness.Moreover, while analogical prompting lowers model uncertainty over direct prompting, most uncertainty arises during the analogy transfer step.These findings highlight the limitations of analogical knowledge transfer in LLMs and demonstrate the potential of UE methods for detecting hallucinated reasoning in black-box settings.

Authors

Publication Details

Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2025.knowllm-1.8
Primary Topic
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Can LLMs Recognize Their Own Analogical Hallucinations? Evaluating Uncertainty Estimation for Analogical Reasoning

Zhiquan Feng, Jianfei Ma, Zheng Chen, Bo Li et al.
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
article

Can LLMs Recognize Their Own Analogical Hallucinations? Evaluating Uncertainty Estimation for Analogical Reasoning

Zhiquan Feng, Jianfei Ma, Zheng Chen, Bo Li, Jiexi Xu
article en

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) often demonstrate strong performance by leveraging implicit knowledge acquired during pretraining.Analogical reasoning, which solves new problems by referencing similar known examples, offers a structured way to utilize this knowledge, but can also lead to subtle factual errors and hallucinations.In this work, we investigate whether LLMs can recognize the reliability of their own analogical outputs using black-box uncertainty estimation (UE).We evaluate six UE metrics across two reasoningintensive tasks: mathematical problem solving and code generation.Our results show that Kernel Language Entropy (KLE) and Lexical Similarity (LexSim) are the most robust indicators of correctness.Moreover, while analogical prompting lowers model uncertainty over direct prompting, most uncertainty arises during the analogy transfer step.These findings highlight the limitations of analogical knowledge transfer in LLMs and demonstrate the potential of UE methods for detecting hallucinated reasoning in black-box settings.

Openalex Percentile: Top 78%
Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Can LLMs Recognize Their Own Analogical Hallucinations? Evaluating Uncertainty Estimation for Analogical Reasoning — Zhiquan Feng, Jianfei Ma, et al. · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS