Eliciting information to reduce uncertainty about a latent entity is a critical task in many application domains, e.g., assessing individual student learning outcomes, diagnosing underlying diseases, or learning user preferences. Though natural language is a powerful medium for this purpose, large language models (LLMs) and existing fine-tuning algorithms lack mechanisms for strategically gathering information to refine their own understanding of the latent entity. To harness the generalization power and world knowledge of LLMs in developing effective information-gathering strategies, we propose an adaptive elicitation framework that actively reduces uncertainty on the latent entity. Since probabilistic modeling of an abstract latent entity is difficult, our framework adopts a predictive view of uncertainty, using a meta-learned language model to simulate future observations and enable scalable uncertainty quantification over complex natural language. Through autoregressive forward simulation, our model quantifies how new questions reduce epistemic uncertainty, enabling the development of sophisticated information-gathering strategies to choose the most informative next queries. In experiments on the 20 questions game, dynamic opinion polling, and adaptive student assessment, our method consistently outperforms baselines in identifying critical unknowns and improving downstream predictions, illustrating the promise of strategic information gathering in natural language settings.

Automated fact-checking aims to assess the truthfulness of text based on relevant evidence, yet verifying complex claims requiring multi-hop reasoning remains a significant challenge. We propose GraphCheck, a novel framework that converts claims into entity-relationship graphs for comprehensive verification. By identifying relation between explicit entities and latent entities across multiple paths, GraphCheck enhances the adaptability and robustness of verification. Furthermore, we introduce DP-GraphCheck, a two-stage variant that improves performance by incorporating direct prompting as an initial filtering step. Experiments on the HOVER and EX-FEVER datasets show that our approach outperforms existing methods, particularly in multi-hop reasoning tasks. Furthermore, our two-stage framework generalizes well to other fact-checking pipelines, demonstrating its versatility.

Record linkage involves merging records in large, noisy databases to remove duplicate entities. It has become an important area because of its widespread occurrence in bibliometrics, public health, official statistics production, political science, and beyond. Traditional linkage methods directly linking records to one another are computationally infeasible as the number of records grows. As a result, it is increasingly common for researchers to treat record linkage as a clustering task, in which each latent entity is associated with one or more noisy database records. We critically assess performance bounds using the Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence under a Bayesian record linkage framework, making connections to Kolchin partition models. We provide an upper bound using the KL divergence and a lower bound on the minimum probability of misclassifying a latent entity. We give insights for when our bounds hold using simulated data and provide practical user guidance.