Competence-Based Analysis of Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.00333v4
• Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 17:27:47 GMT
• Title: Competence-Based Analysis of Language Models
• Authors: Adam Davies, Jize Jiang, ChengXiang Zhai,
• Abstract summary: CALM (Competence-based Analysis of Language Models) is designed to investigate LLM competence in the context of specific tasks. We develop a new approach for performing causal probing interventions using gradient-based adversarial attacks. We carry out a case study of CALM using these interventions to analyze and compare LLM competence across a variety of lexical inference tasks.
• Score: 21.43498764977656
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Despite the recent successes of large, pretrained neural language models (LLMs), comparatively little is known about the representations of linguistic structure they learn during pretraining, which can lead to unexpected behaviors in response to prompt variation or distribution shift. To better understand these models and behaviors, we introduce a general model analysis framework to study LLMs with respect to their representation and use of human-interpretable linguistic properties. Our framework, CALM (Competence-based Analysis of Language Models), is designed to investigate LLM competence in the context of specific tasks by intervening on models' internal representations of different linguistic properties using causal probing, and measuring models' alignment under these interventions with a given ground-truth causal model of the task. We also develop a new approach for performing causal probing interventions using gradient-based adversarial attacks, which can target a broader range of properties and representations than prior techniques. Finally, we carry out a case study of CALM using these interventions to analyze and compare LLM competence across a variety of lexical inference tasks, showing that CALM can be used to explain and predict behaviors across these tasks.

Related papers

• Investigating the Zone of Proximal Development of Language Models for In-Context Learning [59.91708683601029]
  We introduce a learning analytics framework to analyze the in-context learning (ICL) behavior of large language models (LLMs) We adapt the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) theory to ICL, measuring the ZPD of LLMs based on model performance on individual examples. Our findings reveal a series of intricate and multifaceted behaviors of ICL, providing new insights into understanding and leveraging this technique.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-10T19:36:21Z)
• The Inherent Limits of Pretrained LLMs: The Unexpected Convergence of Instruction Tuning and In-Context Learning Capabilities [51.594836904623534]
  We investigate whether instruction-tuned models possess fundamentally different capabilities from base models that are prompted using in-context examples. We show that the performance of instruction-tuned models is significantly correlated with the in-context performance of their base counterparts. Specifically, we extend this understanding to instruction-tuned models, suggesting that their pretraining data similarly sets a limiting boundary on the tasks they can solve.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-15T10:57:55Z)
• Linguistically Grounded Analysis of Language Models using Shapley Head Values [2.914115079173979]
  We investigate the processing of morphosyntactic phenomena by leveraging a recently proposed method for probing language models via Shapley Head Values (SHVs) Using the English language BLiMP dataset, we test our approach on two widely used models, BERT and RoBERTa, and compare how linguistic constructions are handled. Our results show that SHV-based attributions reveal distinct patterns across both models, providing insights into how language models organize and process linguistic information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T09:48:08Z)
• An LLM Feature-based Framework for Dialogue Constructiveness Assessment [8.87747076871578]
  Research on dialogue constructiveness assessment focuses on (i) analysing conversational factors that influence individuals to take specific actions, win debates, change their perspectives or broaden their open-mindedness and (ii) predicting constructiveness outcomes following dialogues for such use cases. These objectives can be achieved by training either interpretable feature-based models or neural models such as pre-trained language models. We propose an LLM feature-based framework for dialogue constructiveness assessment that combines the strengths of feature-based and neural approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T22:10:52Z)
• Evaluating Interventional Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models [58.52919374786108]
  Large language models (LLMs) are used to automate decision-making tasks. In this paper, we evaluate whether LLMs can accurately update their knowledge of a data-generating process in response to an intervention. We create benchmarks that span diverse causal graphs (e.g., confounding, mediation) and variable types. These benchmarks allow us to isolate the ability of LLMs to accurately predict changes resulting from their ability to memorize facts or find other shortcuts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-08T14:15:56Z)
• Unveiling the Generalization Power of Fine-Tuned Large Language Models [81.70754292058258]
  We investigate whether fine-tuning affects the intrinsic generalization ability intrinsic to Large Language Models (LLMs) Our main findings reveal that models fine-tuned on generation and classification tasks exhibit dissimilar behaviors in generalizing to different domains and tasks. We observe that integrating the in-context learning strategy during fine-tuning on generation tasks can enhance the model's generalization ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-14T08:18:59Z)
• Characterizing Truthfulness in Large Language Model Generations with Local Intrinsic Dimension [63.330262740414646]
  We study how to characterize and predict the truthfulness of texts generated from large language models (LLMs) We suggest investigating internal activations and quantifying LLM's truthfulness using the local intrinsic dimension (LID) of model activations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-28T04:56:21Z)
• Large Linguistic Models: Investigating LLMs' metalinguistic abilities [1.0923877073891446]
  We show that OpenAI's o1 vastly outperforms other models on tasks involving drawing syntactic trees and phonological generalization. We speculate that OpenAI o1's unique advantage over other models may result from the model's chain-of-thought mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-01T17:09:33Z)
• Comparative layer-wise analysis of self-supervised speech models [29.258085176788097]
  We measure acoustic, phonetic, and word-level properties encoded in individual layers, using a lightweight analysis tool based on canonical correlation analysis (CCA) We find that these properties evolve across layers differently depending on the model, and the variations relate to the choice of pre-training objective. We discover that CCA trends provide reliable guidance to choose layers of interest for downstream tasks and that single-layer performance often matches or improves upon using all layers, suggesting implications for more efficient use of pre-trained models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-08T00:59:05Z)
• Testing Pre-trained Language Models' Understanding of Distributivity via Causal Mediation Analysis [13.07356367140208]
  We introduce DistNLI, a new diagnostic dataset for natural language inference. We find that the extent of models' understanding is associated with model size and vocabulary size.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-11T00:33:28Z)
• Did the Cat Drink the Coffee? Challenging Transformers with Generalized Event Knowledge [59.22170796793179]
  Transformers Language Models (TLMs) were tested on a benchmark for the textitdynamic estimation of thematic fit Our results show that TLMs can reach performances that are comparable to those achieved by SDM. However, additional analysis consistently suggests that TLMs do not capture important aspects of event knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-22T20:52:26Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.