Distortions in Judged Spatial Relations in Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.04218v2
• Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 12:01:56 GMT
• Title: Distortions in Judged Spatial Relations in Large Language Models
• Authors: Nir Fulman, Abdulkadir Memduhoğlu, Alexander Zipf,
• Abstract summary: GPT-4 exhibited superior performance with 55 percent accuracy, followed by GPT-3.5 at 47 percent, and Llama-2 at 45 percent. The models identified the nearest cardinal direction in most cases, reflecting their associative learning mechanism.
• Score: 45.875801135769585
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: We present a benchmark for assessing the capability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to discern intercardinal directions between geographic locations and apply it to three prominent LLMs: GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Llama-2. This benchmark specifically evaluates whether LLMs exhibit a hierarchical spatial bias similar to humans, where judgments about individual locations' spatial relationships are influenced by the perceived relationships of the larger groups that contain them. To investigate this, we formulated 14 questions focusing on well-known American cities. Seven questions were designed to challenge the LLMs with scenarios potentially influenced by the orientation of larger geographical units, such as states or countries, while the remaining seven targeted locations were less susceptible to such hierarchical categorization. Among the tested models, GPT-4 exhibited superior performance with 55 percent accuracy, followed by GPT-3.5 at 47 percent, and Llama-2 at 45 percent. The models showed significantly reduced accuracy on tasks with suspected hierarchical bias. For example, GPT-4's accuracy dropped to 33 percent on these tasks, compared to 86 percent on others. However, the models identified the nearest cardinal direction in most cases, reflecting their associative learning mechanism, thereby embodying human-like misconceptions. We discuss avenues for improving the spatial reasoning capabilities of LLMs.

Related papers

• Hate Personified: Investigating the role of LLMs in content moderation [64.26243779985393]
  For subjective tasks such as hate detection, where people perceive hate differently, the Large Language Model's (LLM) ability to represent diverse groups is unclear. By including additional context in prompts, we analyze LLM's sensitivity to geographical priming, persona attributes, and numerical information to assess how well the needs of various groups are reflected.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T16:43:17Z)
• STOP! Benchmarking Large Language Models with Sensitivity Testing on Offensive Progressions [6.19084217044276]
  Mitigating explicit and implicit biases in Large Language Models (LLMs) has become a critical focus in the field of natural language processing. We introduce the Sensitivity Testing on Offensive Progressions dataset, which includes 450 offensive progressions containing 2,700 unique sentences. Our findings reveal that even the best-performing models detect bias inconsistently, with success rates ranging from 19.3% to 69.8%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-20T18:34:38Z)
• Reasoning Paths with Reference Objects Elicit Quantitative Spatial Reasoning in Large Vision-Language Models [61.899791071654654]
  We introduce a benchmark, Q-Spatial Bench, with 271 questions across five categories designed for quantitative spatial reasoning. We investigate the performance of state-of-the-art vision-language models (VLMs) on this task. We develop a zero-shot prompting technique, SpatialPrompt, that encourages VLMs to answer quantitative spatial questions using reference objects as visual cues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-15T16:45:42Z)
• Are Large Language Models Strategic Decision Makers? A Study of Performance and Bias in Two-Player Non-Zero-Sum Games [56.70628673595041]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have been increasingly used in real-world settings, yet their strategic decision-making abilities remain largely unexplored. This work investigates the performance and merits of LLMs in canonical game-theoretic two-player non-zero-sum games, Stag Hunt and Prisoner Dilemma. Our structured evaluation of GPT-3.5, GPT-4-Turbo, GPT-4o, and Llama-3-8B shows that these models, when making decisions in these games, are affected by at least one of the following systematic biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-05T12:30:02Z)
• Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Next Location Predictors [4.315451628809687]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown good generalization and reasoning capabilities. LLMs can obtain accuracies up to 36.2%, a significant improvement of almost 640% when compared to other models specifically designed for human mobility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-31T16:07:33Z)
• Advancing LLM Reasoning Generalists with Preference Trees [119.57169648859707]
  We introduce Eurus, a suite of large language models (LLMs) optimized for reasoning. Eurus models achieve state-of-the-art results among open-source models on a diverse set of benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-02T16:25:30Z)
• LM4OPT: Unveiling the Potential of Large Language Models in Formulating Mathematical Optimization Problems [0.0]
  This study compares prominent Large Language Models, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Llama-2-7b, in zero-shot and one-shot settings. Our findings show GPT-4's superior performance, particularly in the one-shot scenario.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-02T23:32:33Z)
• Split and Merge: Aligning Position Biases in LLM-based Evaluators [22.265542509143756]
  PORTIA is an alignment-based system designed to mimic human comparison strategies to calibrate position bias. Our results show that PORTIA markedly enhances the consistency rates for all the models and comparison forms tested. It rectifies around 80% of the position bias instances within the GPT-4 model, elevating its consistency rate up to 98%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-29T14:38:58Z)
• Improving accuracy of GPT-3/4 results on biomedical data using a retrieval-augmented language model [0.0]
  Large language models (LLMs) have made significant advancements in natural language processing (NLP) Training LLMs on focused corpora poses computational challenges. An alternative approach is to use a retrieval-augmentation (RetA) method tested in a specific domain. OpenAI's GPT-3, GPT-4, Bing's Prometheus, and a custom RetA model were compared using 19 questions on diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) disease.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T17:33:05Z)
• Improving Visual Grounding by Encouraging Consistent Gradient-based Explanations [58.442103936918805]
  We show that Attention Mask Consistency produces superior visual grounding results than previous methods. AMC is effective, easy to implement, and is general as it can be adopted by any vision-language model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-30T17:55:12Z)

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.