Abstract
Uncertainty expressions such as ``probably'' or ``highly unlikely'' arepervasive in human language. While prior work has established that there ispopulation-level agreement in terms of how humans interpret these expressions,there has been little inquiry into the abilities of language models tointerpret such expressions. In this paper, we investigate how language modelsmap linguistic expressions of uncertainty to numerical responses. Our approachassesses whether language models can employ theory of mind in this setting:understanding the uncertainty of another agent about a particular statement,independently of the model's own certainty about that statement. We evaluateboth humans and 10 popular language models on a task created to assess theseabilities. Unexpectedly, we find that 8 out of 10 models are able to mapuncertainty expressions to probabilistic responses in a human-like manner.However, we observe systematically different behavior depending on whether astatement is actually true or false. This sensitivity indicates that languagemodels are substantially more susceptible to bias based on their priorknowledge (as compared to humans). These findings raise important questions andhave broad implications for human-AI alignment and AI-AI communication.