cs.LGOct 26, 2026

Reinforcement Learning Done Right for Explicit Confidence Targets

Authors: Zefeng He, Yichen He, Yuan Lin, Yang Yang, Yu Cheng

Organizations: ByteDance Seed · Shanghai Jiao Tong University · NTU

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) can produce plausible but incorrect answers when they are uncertain, which can mislead users and undermine model reliability. Training models to abstain with reinforcement learning is a natural approach, but most existing methods use a fixed error penalty and therefore cannot adapt their behavior to different confidence requirements at inference time. We study explicit confidence targets, where a user specifies a target pp in the prompt and the model directly chooses whether to answer or abstain, with the goal of achieving an accuracy of at least pp among answered questions. However, learning to respond to different confidence targets with a single model has proven difficult, and prior attempts have failed to distinguish different targets. We show that this failure comes from two problems: the reward signal that distinguishes different values of pp is often lost during optimization, while the original error penalty grows without bound as pp approaches one. We propose RLEC (Reinforcement Learning with Explicit Confidence Targets), which preserves the learning signal needed to distinguish confidence targets, introduces a stable reward family that keeps the desired answer condition unchanged, and uses reward scheduling to balance effective learning and training stability. Together, these designs enable the first successful training of a single LLM for explicit confidence target control. Extensive experiments across diverse benchmarks and model scales show that RLEC largely preserves general capabilities and achieves competitive calibration performance. RLEC also supports fine-grained target control without an external decision system or threshold calibration after training. By making explicit confidence targets part of the trained policy, RLEC opens a new and more direct path toward behavioral calibration.

Explore similar work

Apr 25, 2026

Process Supervision of Confidence Margin for Calibrated LLM Reasoning

Scaling test-time computation with reinforcement learning (RL) has emerged as a reliable path to improve large language models (LLM) reasoning ability. Yet, outcome-based reward often incentivizes models to be overconfident, leading to hallucinations, unreliable confidence-based control, and unnecessary compute allocation. We introduce Reinforcement Learning with Confidence Margin (RLCM), a calibration-aware RL framework that jointly optimizes correctness and confidence reliability via a margin-enhanced process reward over intermediate-budget completions. Rather than aligning confidence to correctness likelihoods, RLCM encourages to widen the confidence margin between correct and incorrect steps within a single reasoning trajectory. Across mathematical, code, logic and science benchmarks, our method substantially improves calibration while maintaining or improving accuracy. We further show that, with calibrated confidence signals, the resulting models enable more efficient conformal risk control and effective confidence-weighted aggregation.
Jul 5, 2026

On the effectiveness of reward functions in reinforcement learning for confidence calibration of large language models

In this paper, we consider the setting where large language models (LLMs) are trained using reinforcement learning (RL) to simultaneously improve reasoning accuracy and verbalize their confidence. Our reward scheme uses two functions for rewarding confidence verbalized by the LLM: one for correct answers and the other for incorrect answers. If poorly designed, such a scheme may incentivize an LLM to answer incorrectly in order for its confidence to be calibrated, a phenomenon we term confidence reward hacking. We introduce the notion of non-hackable confidence reward schemes and provide methods for constructing them. We show that selective confidence reward hacking can arise in practical datasets under hackable reward schemes while non-hackable reward schemes are resistant to hacking. Finally, we place some of these schemes along an overconfidence-underconfidence spectrum for RL-based confidence calibration and demonstrate experimentally that they tend to exhibit the corresponding calibration biases relative to other schemes in the spectrum. The code of our experiments is available in https://anonymous.4open.science/r/rl-confidence-calibration-9ED4/README.md.
Oct 26, 2026

CalibraRL: Confidence-Calibrated Reinforcement Learning for Mitigating Hallucinations in RAG

Large language models (LLMs) often produce plausible but incorrect answers, motivating reinforcement learning methods that reward correct answers, penalize incorrect answers, and allow abstention. However, fixed outcome-based rewards do not distinguish incorrect responses with different confidence levels or account for differences in answering reliability across queries. Consequently, such rewards may inadequately penalize overconfident errors and fail to discourage unnecessary abstention. We propose CalibraRL, a reinforcement learning framework that incorporates response confidence and query-level answering evidence into reward design. For non-abstaining responses, CalibraRL combines correctness-based utility with a Brier-based penalty that encourages agreement between confidence and correctness. For abstentions, it estimates conditional answering reliability using a Beta posterior derived from the correctness of non-abstaining responses within each sampled group. The abstention reward increases with the posterior probability that the model's accuracy on non-abstaining responses is below a predefined threshold. CalibraRL reuses training rollouts without requiring additional annotations indicating whether the model knows the answer to each question. Experiments on three QA datasets demonstrate that CalibraRL improves answer precision and reduces hallucinations compared with strong baselines. Further analysis shows that CalibraRL reduces mean expected calibration error (ECE) by 30.8% across two backbone models and three datasets, highlighting its potential to improve the reliability of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) in web search.