HGOT: Hierarchical Graph of Thoughts for Retrieval-Augmented In-Context Learning in Factuality Evaluation
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.09390v2
- Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 12:42:59 GMT
- Title: HGOT: Hierarchical Graph of Thoughts for Retrieval-Augmented In-Context Learning in Factuality Evaluation
- Authors: Yihao Fang, Stephen W. Thomas, Xiaodan Zhu,
- Abstract summary: We introduce the hierarchical graph of thoughts (HGOT) to enhance the retrieval of pertinent passages during in-context learning.
The framework employs the divide-and-conquer strategy to break down complex queries into manageable sub-queries.
It refines self-consistency majority voting for answer selection, which incorporates the recently proposed citation recall and precision metrics.
- Score: 20.178644251662316
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: With the widespread adoption of large language models (LLMs) in numerous applications, the challenge of factuality and the propensity for hallucinations has emerged as a significant concern. To address this issue, particularly in retrieval-augmented in-context learning, we introduce the hierarchical graph of thoughts (HGOT), a structured, multi-layered graph approach designed to enhance the retrieval of pertinent passages during in-context learning. The framework utilizes the emergent planning capabilities of LLMs, employing the divide-and-conquer strategy to break down complex queries into manageable sub-queries. It refines self-consistency majority voting for answer selection, which incorporates the recently proposed citation recall and precision metrics to assess the quality of thoughts, linking an answer's credibility intrinsically to the thought's quality. This methodology introduces a weighted system in majority voting, prioritizing answers based on the citation quality of their thoughts. Additionally, we propose a scoring mechanism for evaluating retrieved passages, considering factors such as citation frequency and quality, self-consistency confidence, and the retrieval module's ranking. Experiments indicate that HGOT excels as a versatile approach, outperforming competing models in FEVER by up to $7\%$ and matching leading models such as Retrieve-then-Read in Open-SQuAD, and DSP in HotPotQA, demonstrating its efficacy in enhancing LLMs' factuality.
Related papers
- Context Awareness Gate For Retrieval Augmented Generation [2.749898166276854]
Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) has emerged as a widely adopted approach to mitigate the limitations of large language models (LLMs) in answering domain-specific questions.
Previous research has predominantly focused on improving the accuracy and quality of retrieved data chunks to enhance the overall performance of the generation pipeline.
We investigate the impact of retrieving irrelevant information in open-domain question answering, highlighting its significant detrimental effect on the quality of LLM outputs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-25T06:48:38Z) - Self-Calibrated Listwise Reranking with Large Language Models [137.6557607279876]
Large language models (LLMs) have been employed in reranking tasks through a sequence-to-sequence approach.
This reranking paradigm requires a sliding window strategy to iteratively handle larger candidate sets.
We propose a novel self-calibrated listwise reranking method, which aims to leverage LLMs to produce global relevance scores for ranking.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-07T10:31:31Z) - Weak-eval-Strong: Evaluating and Eliciting Lateral Thinking of LLMs with Situation Puzzles [20.18736445118689]
We introduce SPLAT, a benchmark leveraging Situation Puzzles to evaluate and elicit lateral thinking of Large Language Models (LLMs)
This benchmark, containing 975 graded situation puzzles across three difficulty levels, employs a new multi-turn player-judge framework instead of the traditional model-based evaluation.
Experiments demonstrate that a robust evaluation model, such as WizardLM-2, closely matches human judgements in both intermediate question-answering and final scenario accuracy.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-09T10:09:11Z) - MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs [55.20845457594977]
Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making.
We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill.
Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-20T03:50:23Z) - Multi-Modal Prompt Learning on Blind Image Quality Assessment [65.0676908930946]
Image Quality Assessment (IQA) models benefit significantly from semantic information, which allows them to treat different types of objects distinctly.
Traditional methods, hindered by a lack of sufficiently annotated data, have employed the CLIP image-text pretraining model as their backbone to gain semantic awareness.
Recent approaches have attempted to address this mismatch using prompt technology, but these solutions have shortcomings.
This paper introduces an innovative multi-modal prompt-based methodology for IQA.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-23T11:45:32Z) - Evaluating Generative Language Models in Information Extraction as Subjective Question Correction [49.729908337372436]
We propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score.
Inspired by the principles in subjective question correction, we propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score.
Results on three information extraction tasks show that SQC-Score is more preferred by human annotators than the baseline metrics.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-04T15:36:53Z) - Debiasing Multimodal Large Language Models [61.6896704217147]
Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have become indispensable tools in computer vision and natural language processing.
Our investigation reveals a noteworthy bias in the generated content, where the output is primarily influenced by the underlying Large Language Models (LLMs) prior to the input image.
To rectify these biases and redirect the model's focus toward vision information, we introduce two simple, training-free strategies.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-08T12:35:07Z) - Benchmarking Large Language Models in Complex Question Answering
Attribution using Knowledge Graphs [35.089203283068635]
We introduce a set of fine-grained categories for measuring the attribution, and develop a Complex Attributed Question Answering (CAQA) benchmark.
Our analysis reveals that existing evaluators perform poorly under fine-grained attribution settings and exhibit weaknesses in complex citation-statement reasoning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-26T04:11:07Z) - DCR-Consistency: Divide-Conquer-Reasoning for Consistency Evaluation and
Improvement of Large Language Models [4.953092503184905]
This work proposes DCR, an automated framework for evaluating and improving the consistency of Large Language Models (LLMs) generated texts.
We introduce an automatic metric converter (AMC) that translates the output from DCE into an interpretable numeric score.
Our approach also substantially reduces nearly 90% of output inconsistencies, showing promise for effective hallucination mitigation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-04T08:34:16Z) - Don't Be So Sure! Boosting ASR Decoding via Confidence Relaxation [7.056222499095849]
beam search seeks the transcript with the greatest likelihood computed using the predicted distribution.
We show that recently proposed Self-Supervised Learning (SSL)-based ASR models tend to yield exceptionally confident predictions.
We propose a decoding procedure that improves the performance of fine-tuned ASR models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-12-27T06:42:26Z) - Investigating Fairness Disparities in Peer Review: A Language Model
Enhanced Approach [77.61131357420201]
We conduct a thorough and rigorous study on fairness disparities in peer review with the help of large language models (LMs)
We collect, assemble, and maintain a comprehensive relational database for the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) conference from 2017 to date.
We postulate and study fairness disparities on multiple protective attributes of interest, including author gender, geography, author, and institutional prestige.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-11-07T16:19:42Z)
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.