The remarkable performance of large language models (LLMs) in content generation, coding, and common-sense reasoning has spurred widespread integration into many facets of society. However, integration of LLMs raises valid questions on their reliability and trustworthiness, given their propensity to generate hallucinations: plausible, factually-incorrect responses, which are expressed with striking confidence. Previous work has shown that hallucinations and other non-factual responses generated by LLMs can be detected by examining the uncertainty of the LLM in its response to the pertinent prompt, driving significant research efforts devoted to quantifying the uncertainty of LLMs. This survey seeks to provide an extensive review of existing uncertainty quantification methods for LLMs, identifying their salient features, along with their strengths and weaknesses. We present existing methods within a relevant taxonomy, unifying ostensibly disparate methods to aid understanding of the state of the art. Furthermore, we highlight applications of uncertainty quantification methods for LLMs, spanning chatbot and textual applications to embodied artificial intelligence applications in robotics. We conclude with open research challenges in uncertainty quantification of LLMs, seeking to motivate future research.

Tasks where robots must anticipate human intent, such as navigating around a cluttered home or sorting everyday items, are challenging because they exhibit a wide range of valid actions that lead to similar outcomes. Moreover, zero-shot cooperation between human-robot partners is an especially challenging problem because it requires the robot to infer and adapt on the fly to a latent human intent, which could vary significantly from human to human. Recently, deep learned motion prediction models have shown promising results in predicting human intent but are prone to being confidently incorrect. In this work, we present Risk-Calibrated Interactive Planning (RCIP), which is a framework for measuring and calibrating risk associated with uncertain action selection in human-robot cooperation, with the fundamental idea that the robot should ask for human clarification when the risk associated with the uncertainty in the human's intent cannot be controlled. RCIP builds on the theory of set-valued risk calibration to provide a finite-sample statistical guarantee on the cumulative loss incurred by the robot while minimizing the cost of human clarification in complex multi-step settings. Our main insight is to frame the risk control problem as a sequence-level multi-hypothesis testing problem, allowing efficient calibration using a low-dimensional parameter that controls a pre-trained risk-aware policy. Experiments across a variety of simulated and real-world environments demonstrate RCIP's ability to predict and adapt to a diverse set of dynamic human intents.

Interactions between road agents present a significant challenge in trajectory prediction, especially in cases involving multiple agents. Because existing diversity-aware predictors do not account for the interactive nature of multi-agent predictions, they may miss these important interaction outcomes. In this paper, we propose NashFormer, a framework for trajectory prediction that leverages game-theoretic inverse reinforcement learning to improve coverage of multi-modal predictions. We use a training-time game-theoretic analysis as an auxiliary loss resulting in improved coverage and accuracy without presuming a taxonomy of actions for the agents. We demonstrate our approach on the interactive split of the Waymo Open Motion Dataset, including four subsets involving scenarios with high interaction complexity. Experiment results show that our predictor produces accurate predictions while covering $33\%$ more potential interactions versus a baseline model.