Large Language Models, scientific knowledge and factuality: A framework to streamline human expert evaluation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2305.17819v3
• Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2024 12:49:35 GMT
• Title: Large Language Models, scientific knowledge and factuality: A framework to streamline human expert evaluation
• Authors: Magdalena Wysocka, Oskar Wysocki, Maxime Delmas, Vincent Mutel, Andre Freitas,
• Abstract summary: This work explores the potential of Large Language Models for dialoguing with biomedical background knowledge. The framework involves of three evaluation steps, each assessing different aspects sequentially: fluency, prompt alignment, semantic coherence, factual knowledge, and specificity of the generated responses. The work provides a systematic assessment on the ability of eleven state-of-the-art models LLMs, including ChatGPT, GPT-4 and Llama 2, in two prompting-based tasks.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: The paper introduces a framework for the evaluation of the encoding of factual scientific knowledge, designed to streamline the manual evaluation process typically conducted by domain experts. Inferring over and extracting information from Large Language Models (LLMs) trained on a large corpus of scientific literature can potentially define a step change in biomedical discovery, reducing the barriers for accessing and integrating existing medical evidence. This work explores the potential of LLMs for dialoguing with biomedical background knowledge, using the context of antibiotic discovery. The framework involves of three evaluation steps, each assessing different aspects sequentially: fluency, prompt alignment, semantic coherence, factual knowledge, and specificity of the generated responses. By splitting these tasks between non-experts and experts, the framework reduces the effort required from the latter. The work provides a systematic assessment on the ability of eleven state-of-the-art models LLMs, including ChatGPT, GPT-4 and Llama 2, in two prompting-based tasks: chemical compound definition generation and chemical compound-fungus relation determination. Although recent models have improved in fluency, factual accuracy is still low and models are biased towards over-represented entities. The ability of LLMs to serve as biomedical knowledge bases is questioned, and the need for additional systematic evaluation frameworks is highlighted. While LLMs are currently not fit for purpose to be used as biomedical factual knowledge bases in a zero-shot setting, there is a promising emerging property in the direction of factuality as the models become domain specialised, scale-up in size and level of human feedback.

Related papers

• Reasoning-Enhanced Healthcare Predictions with Knowledge Graph Community Retrieval [61.70489848327436]
  KARE is a novel framework that integrates knowledge graph (KG) community-level retrieval with large language models (LLMs) reasoning. Extensive experiments demonstrate that KARE outperforms leading models by up to 10.8-15.0% on MIMIC-III and 12.6-12.7% on MIMIC-IV for mortality and readmission predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-06T18:46:28Z)
• Diagnostic Reasoning in Natural Language: Computational Model and Application [68.47402386668846]
  We investigate diagnostic abductive reasoning (DAR) in the context of language-grounded tasks (NL-DAR) We propose a novel modeling framework for NL-DAR based on Pearl's structural causal models. We use the resulting dataset to investigate the human decision-making process in NL-DAR.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-09T06:55:37Z)
• LLMs are not Zero-Shot Reasoners for Biomedical Information Extraction [13.965777046473885]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted for applications in healthcare. It is unclear how well LLMs perform on tasks that are traditionally pursued in the biomedical domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-22T09:37:40Z)
• Large Language Models as Biomedical Hypothesis Generators: A Comprehensive Evaluation [15.495976478018264]
  Large language models (LLMs) have emerged as a promising tool to revolutionize knowledge interaction. We construct a dataset of background-hypothesis pairs from biomedical literature, partitioned into training, seen, and unseen test sets. We assess the hypothesis generation capabilities of top-tier instructed models in zero-shot, few-shot, and fine-tuning settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-12T02:55:13Z)
• M-QALM: A Benchmark to Assess Clinical Reading Comprehension and Knowledge Recall in Large Language Models via Question Answering [14.198330378235632]
  We use Multiple Choice and Abstractive Question Answering to conduct a large-scale empirical study on 22 datasets in three generalist and three specialist biomedical sub-domains. Our multifaceted analysis of the performance of 15 LLMs uncovers success factors such as instruction tuning that lead to improved recall and comprehension. We show that while recently proposed domain-adapted models may lack adequate knowledge, directly fine-tuning on our collected medical knowledge datasets shows encouraging results. We complement the quantitative results with a skill-oriented manual error analysis, which reveals a significant gap between the models' capabilities to simply recall necessary knowledge and to integrate it with the presented
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-06T02:43:21Z)
• Diversifying Knowledge Enhancement of Biomedical Language Models using Adapter Modules and Knowledge Graphs [54.223394825528665]
  We develop an approach that uses lightweight adapter modules to inject structured biomedical knowledge into pre-trained language models. We use two large KGs, the biomedical knowledge system UMLS and the novel biochemical OntoChem, with two prominent biomedical PLMs, PubMedBERT and BioLinkBERT. We show that our methodology leads to performance improvements in several instances while keeping requirements in computing power low.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-21T14:26:57Z)
• Customizing Large Language Models for Business Context: Framework and Experiments [4.922554372855655]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have ushered in a new era for design science in Information Systems. We propose and test a novel framework to customize LLMs for general business contexts. We instantiate our proposed framework in the context of medical consultation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-15T21:42:19Z)
• Exploring the Cognitive Knowledge Structure of Large Language Models: An Educational Diagnostic Assessment Approach [50.125704610228254]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have not only exhibited exceptional performance across various tasks, but also demonstrated sparks of intelligence. Recent studies have focused on assessing their capabilities on human exams and revealed their impressive competence in different domains. We conduct an evaluation using MoocRadar, a meticulously annotated human test dataset based on Bloom taxonomy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-12T09:55:45Z)
• Self-Verification Improves Few-Shot Clinical Information Extraction [73.6905567014859]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown the potential to accelerate clinical curation via few-shot in-context learning. They still struggle with issues regarding accuracy and interpretability, especially in mission-critical domains such as health. Here, we explore a general mitigation framework using self-verification, which leverages the LLM to provide provenance for its own extraction and check its own outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-30T22:05:11Z)
• Scientific Language Models for Biomedical Knowledge Base Completion: An Empirical Study [62.376800537374024]
  We study scientific LMs for KG completion, exploring whether we can tap into their latent knowledge to enhance biomedical link prediction. We integrate the LM-based models with KG embedding models, using a router method that learns to assign each input example to either type of model and provides a substantial boost in performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-17T17:55:33Z)

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.