<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Trained on Tokens, Calibrated on Concepts: The Emergence of Semantic Calibration in LLMs · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2511.04869/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2511.04869/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Trained on Tokens, Calibrated on Concepts: The Emergence of Semantic Calibration in LLMs — mentioned by andy12_</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47205210</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2511.04869:47205210</guid><pubDate>Sun, 01 Mar 2026 09:43:56 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;The model could report the confidence of its output distribution, but it isn&amp;#x27;t necessarily calibrated (that is, even if it tells you that it&amp;#x27;s 70% confident, it doesn&amp;#x27;t mean that it is right 70% of the time). Famously, pre-trained base models are calibrated, but they stop being calibrated when they are post-trained to be instruction-following chatbots [1]. Edit: There is also some other work that points out that chat models might not be calibrated at the token-level, but might be calibrated at the concept-level [2]. Which means that if you sample many answers, and group them by semantic…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2511.04869/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CL</category></item></channel></rss>
