AuditLLM: A Tool for Auditing Large Language Models Using Multiprobe Approach

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.09334v2
• Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 18:24:41 GMT
• Title: AuditLLM: A Tool for Auditing Large Language Models Using Multiprobe Approach
• Authors: Maryam Amirizaniani, Elias Martin, Tanya Roosta, Aman Chadha, Chirag Shah,
• Abstract summary: AuditLLM is a novel tool designed to audit the performance of various Large Language Models (LLMs) in a methodical way. A robust, reliable, and consistent LLM is expected to generate semantically similar responses to variably phrased versions of the same question. A certain level of inconsistency has been shown to be an indicator of potential bias, hallucinations, and other issues.
• Score: 8.646131951484696
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) are integrated into various sectors, ensuring their reliability and safety is crucial. This necessitates rigorous probing and auditing to maintain their effectiveness and trustworthiness in practical applications. Subjecting LLMs to varied iterations of a single query can unveil potential inconsistencies in their knowledge base or functional capacity. However, a tool for performing such audits with a easy to execute workflow, and low technical threshold is lacking. In this demo, we introduce ``AuditLLM,'' a novel tool designed to audit the performance of various LLMs in a methodical way. AuditLLM's primary function is to audit a given LLM by deploying multiple probes derived from a single question, thus detecting any inconsistencies in the model's comprehension or performance. A robust, reliable, and consistent LLM is expected to generate semantically similar responses to variably phrased versions of the same question. Building on this premise, AuditLLM generates easily interpretable results that reflect the LLM's consistency based on a single input question provided by the user. A certain level of inconsistency has been shown to be an indicator of potential bias, hallucinations, and other issues. One could then use the output of AuditLLM to further investigate issues with the aforementioned LLM. To facilitate demonstration and practical uses, AuditLLM offers two key modes: (1) Live mode which allows instant auditing of LLMs by analyzing responses to real-time queries; and (2) Batch mode which facilitates comprehensive LLM auditing by processing multiple queries at once for in-depth analysis. This tool is beneficial for both researchers and general users, as it enhances our understanding of LLMs' capabilities in generating responses, using a standardized auditing platform.

Related papers

• Evaluating Consistencies in LLM responses through a Semantic Clustering of Question Answering [1.9214041945441436]
  We present a new approach for evaluating semanticencies of Large Language Model (LLM) Our approach evaluates whether LLM re-sponses are semantically congruent for a given question, recognizing that as syntactically different sentences may convey the same meaning. Using the TruthfulQA dataset to assess LLM responses, the study induces N re-sponses per question and clusters semantically equivalent sentences to measure semantic consistency across 37 categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-20T16:21:25Z)
• Embodied Agent Interface: Benchmarking LLMs for Embodied Decision Making [85.24399869971236]
  We aim to evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) for embodied decision making. Existing evaluations tend to rely solely on a final success rate. We propose a generalized interface (Embodied Agent Interface) that supports the formalization of various types of tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T17:59:00Z)
• Learning to Ask: When LLMs Meet Unclear Instruction [49.256630152684764]
  Large language models (LLMs) can leverage external tools for addressing a range of tasks unattainable through language skills alone. We evaluate the performance of LLMs tool-use under imperfect instructions, analyze the error patterns, and build a challenging tool-use benchmark called Noisy ToolBench. We propose a novel framework, Ask-when-Needed (AwN), which prompts LLMs to ask questions to users whenever they encounter obstacles due to unclear instructions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-31T23:06:12Z)
• Large Language Models for Anomaly Detection in Computational Workflows: from Supervised Fine-Tuning to In-Context Learning [9.601067780210006]
  This paper leverages large language models (LLMs) for workflow anomaly detection by exploiting their ability to learn complex data patterns. Two approaches are investigated: 1) supervised fine-tuning (SFT), where pre-trained LLMs are fine-tuned on labeled data for sentence classification to identify anomalies, and 2) in-context learning (ICL) where prompts containing task descriptions and examples guide LLMs in few-shot anomaly detection without fine-tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-24T16:33:04Z)
• SELF-GUIDE: Better Task-Specific Instruction Following via Self-Synthetic Finetuning [70.21358720599821]
  Large language models (LLMs) hold the promise of solving diverse tasks when provided with appropriate natural language prompts. We propose SELF-GUIDE, a multi-stage mechanism in which we synthesize task-specific input-output pairs from the student LLM. We report an absolute improvement of approximately 15% for classification tasks and 18% for generation tasks in the benchmark's metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T04:41:58Z)
• Detecting Hallucinations in Large Language Model Generation: A Token Probability Approach [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) produce inaccurate outputs, also known as hallucinations. This paper introduces a supervised learning approach employing only four numerical features derived from tokens and vocabulary probabilities obtained from other evaluators. The method yields promising results, surpassing state-of-the-art outcomes in multiple tasks across three different benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-30T03:00:47Z)
• LLMAuditor: A Framework for Auditing Large Language Models Using Human-in-the-Loop [7.77005079649294]
  An effective method is to probe the Large Language Models using different versions of the same question. To operationalize this auditing method at scale, we need an approach to create those probes reliably and automatically. We propose the LLMAuditor framework, where one uses a different LLM along with human-in-the-loop (HIL) This approach offers verifiability and transparency, while avoiding circular reliance on the same LLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-14T17:49:31Z)
• Small LLMs Are Weak Tool Learners: A Multi-LLM Agent [73.54562551341454]
  Large Language Model (LLM) agents significantly extend the capabilities of standalone LLMs. We propose a novel approach that decomposes the aforementioned capabilities into a planner, caller, and summarizer. This modular framework facilitates individual updates and the potential use of smaller LLMs for building each capability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-14T16:17:07Z)
• Assessing the Reliability of Large Language Model Knowledge [78.38870272050106]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been treated as knowledge bases due to their strong performance in knowledge probing tasks. How do we evaluate the capabilities of LLMs to consistently produce factually correct answers? We propose MOdel kNowledge relIabiliTy scORe (MONITOR), a novel metric designed to directly measure LLMs' factual reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-15T12:40:30Z)
• MINT: Evaluating LLMs in Multi-turn Interaction with Tools and Language Feedback [78.60644407028022]
  We introduce MINT, a benchmark that evaluates large language models' ability to solve tasks with multi-turn interactions. LLMs generally benefit from tools and language feedback, with performance gains of 1-8% for each turn of tool use. LLMs evaluated, supervised instruction-finetuning (SIFT) and reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) generally hurt multi-turn capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-19T15:25:42Z)

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.