Simple Linguistic Inferences of Large Language Models (LLMs): Blind Spots and Blinds
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.14785v2
- Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 11:16:45 GMT
- Title: Simple Linguistic Inferences of Large Language Models (LLMs): Blind Spots and Blinds
- Authors: Victoria Basmov, Yoav Goldberg, Reut Tsarfaty,
- Abstract summary: We evaluate language understanding capacities on simple inference tasks that most humans find trivial.
We target (i) grammatically-specified entailments, (ii) premises with evidential adverbs of uncertainty, and (iii) monotonicity entailments.
The models exhibit moderate to low performance on these evaluation sets.
- Score: 59.71218039095155
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: We evaluate LLMs' language understanding capacities on simple inference tasks that most humans find trivial. Specifically, we target (i) grammatically-specified entailments, (ii) premises with evidential adverbs of uncertainty, and (iii) monotonicity entailments. We design evaluation sets for these tasks and conduct experiments in both zero-shot and chain-of-thought setups, and with multiple prompts and LLMs. The models exhibit moderate to low performance on these evaluation sets. Subsequent experiments show that embedding the premise in syntactic constructions that should preserve the entailment relations (presupposition triggers) or change them (non-factives), further confuses the models, causing them to either under-predict or over-predict certain entailment labels regardless of the true relation, and often disregarding the nature of the embedding context. Overall these results suggest that, despite LLMs' celebrated language understanding capacity, even the strongest models have blindspots with respect to certain types of entailments, and certain information-packaging structures act as ``blinds'' overshadowing the semantics of the embedded premise.
Related papers
- Constructions Are So Difficult That Even Large Language Models Get Them Right for the Wrong Reasons [43.708431369382176]
We introduce a small challenge dataset for NLI with large lexical overlap.
We show that GPT-4 and Llama 2 fail it with strong bias.
From a Computational Linguistics perspective, we identify a group of constructions with three classes of adjectives which cannot be distinguished by surface features.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-26T14:51:12Z) - Uncertainty Quantification for In-Context Learning of Large Language Models [52.891205009620364]
In-context learning has emerged as a groundbreaking ability of Large Language Models (LLMs)
We propose a novel formulation and corresponding estimation method to quantify both types of uncertainties.
The proposed method offers an unsupervised way to understand the prediction of in-context learning in a plug-and-play fashion.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-15T18:46:24Z) - Explanation-aware Soft Ensemble Empowers Large Language Model In-context
Learning [50.00090601424348]
Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable capabilities in various natural language understanding tasks.
We propose EASE, an Explanation-Aware Soft Ensemble framework to empower in-context learning with LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-13T06:13:38Z) - Are Large Language Models Really Robust to Word-Level Perturbations? [68.60618778027694]
We propose a novel rational evaluation approach that leverages pre-trained reward models as diagnostic tools.
Longer conversations manifest the comprehensive grasp of language models in terms of their proficiency in understanding questions.
Our results demonstrate that LLMs frequently exhibit vulnerability to word-level perturbations that are commonplace in daily language usage.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-20T09:23:46Z) - Evaluating statistical language models as pragmatic reasoners [39.72348730045737]
We evaluate the capacity of large language models to infer meanings of pragmatic utterances.
We find that LLMs can derive context-grounded, human-like distributions over the interpretations of several complex pragmatic utterances.
Results inform the inferential capacity of statistical language models, and their use in pragmatic and semantic parsing applications.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-01T18:22:10Z) - The Goldilocks of Pragmatic Understanding: Fine-Tuning Strategy Matters
for Implicature Resolution by LLMs [26.118193748582197]
We evaluate four categories of widely used state-of-the-art models.
We find that, despite only evaluating on utterances that require a binary inference, models in three of these categories perform close to random.
These results suggest that certain fine-tuning strategies are far better at inducing pragmatic understanding in models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-10-26T19:04:23Z) - Does BERT really agree ? Fine-grained Analysis of Lexical Dependence on
a Syntactic Task [70.29624135819884]
We study the extent to which BERT is able to perform lexically-independent subject-verb number agreement (NA) on targeted syntactic templates.
Our results on nonce sentences suggest that the model generalizes well for simple templates, but fails to perform lexically-independent syntactic generalization when as little as one attractor is present.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-04-14T11:33:15Z) - Masked Language Modeling and the Distributional Hypothesis: Order Word
Matters Pre-training for Little [74.49773960145681]
A possible explanation for the impressive performance of masked language model (MLM)-training is that such models have learned to represent the syntactic structures prevalent in NLP pipelines.
In this paper, we propose a different explanation: pre-trains succeed on downstream tasks almost entirely due to their ability to model higher-order word co-occurrence statistics.
Our results show that purely distributional information largely explains the success of pre-training, and underscore the importance of curating challenging evaluation datasets that require deeper linguistic knowledge.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-04-14T06:30:36Z)
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.