"Understanding AI": Semantic Grounding in Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.10992v1
• Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 14:23:55 GMT
• Title: "Understanding AI": Semantic Grounding in Large Language Models
• Authors: Holger Lyre
• Abstract summary: We have recently witnessed a generative turn in AI, since generative models, including LLMs, are key for self-supervised learning. To assess the question of semantic grounding, I distinguish and discuss five methodological ways.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Do LLMs understand the meaning of the texts they generate? Do they possess a semantic grounding? And how could we understand whether and what they understand? I start the paper with the observation that we have recently witnessed a generative turn in AI, since generative models, including LLMs, are key for self-supervised learning. To assess the question of semantic grounding, I distinguish and discuss five methodological ways. The most promising way is to apply core assumptions of theories of meaning in philosophy of mind and language to LLMs. Grounding proves to be a gradual affair with a three-dimensional distinction between functional, social and causal grounding. LLMs show basic evidence in all three dimensions. A strong argument is that LLMs develop world models. Hence, LLMs are neither stochastic parrots nor semantic zombies, but already understand the language they generate, at least in an elementary sense.

Related papers

• A Perspective on Large Language Models, Intelligent Machines, and Knowledge Acquisition [0.6138671548064355]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are known for their remarkable ability to generate 'knowledge' However, there is a huge gap between LLM's and human capabilities for understanding abstract concepts and reasoning. We discuss these issues in a larger philosophical context of human knowledge acquisition and the Turing test.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-13T03:25:49Z)
• What Do Language Models Learn in Context? The Structured Task Hypothesis [89.65045443150889]
  Large language models (LLMs) learn a novel task from in-context examples presented in a demonstration, termed in-context learning (ICL) One popular hypothesis explains ICL by task selection. Another popular hypothesis is that ICL is a form of meta-learning, i.e., the models learn a learning algorithm at pre-training time and apply it to the demonstration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-06T16:15:34Z)
• Fantastic Semantics and Where to Find Them: Investigating Which Layers of Generative LLMs Reflect Lexical Semantics [50.982315553104975]
  We investigate the bottom-up evolution of lexical semantics for a popular large language model, namely Llama2. Our experiments show that the representations in lower layers encode lexical semantics, while the higher layers, with weaker semantic induction, are responsible for prediction. This is in contrast to models with discriminative objectives, such as mask language modeling, where the higher layers obtain better lexical semantics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-03T13:14:47Z)
• AlignedCoT: Prompting Large Language Models via Native-Speaking Demonstrations [52.43593893122206]
  Alignedcot is an in-context learning technique for invoking Large Language Models. It achieves consistent and correct step-wise prompts in zero-shot scenarios. We conduct experiments on mathematical reasoning and commonsense reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-22T17:24:21Z)
• Grounding Gaps in Language Model Generations [67.79817087930678]
  We study whether large language models generate text that reflects human grounding. We find that -- compared to humans -- LLMs generate language with less conversational grounding. To understand the roots of the identified grounding gap, we examine the role of instruction tuning and preference optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T17:40:27Z)
• LLMs grasp morality in concept [0.46040036610482665]
  We provide a general theory of meaning that extends beyond humans. We suggest that the LLM, by virtue of its position as a meaning-agent, already grasps the constructions of human society. Unaligned models may help us better develop our moral and social philosophy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-04T01:37:41Z)
• Large Language Models: The Need for Nuance in Current Debates and a Pragmatic Perspective on Understanding [1.3654846342364308]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are unparalleled in their ability to generate grammatically correct, fluent text. This position paper critically assesses three points recurring in critiques of LLM capacities. We outline a pragmatic perspective on the issue of real' understanding and intentionality in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T15:51:04Z)
• Meaning and understanding in large language models [0.0]
  Recent developments in the generative large language models (LLMs) of artificial intelligence have led to the belief that traditional philosophical assumptions about machine understanding of language need to be revised. This article critically evaluates the prevailing tendency to regard machine language performance as mere syntactic manipulation and the simulation of understanding, which is only partial and very shallow, without sufficient referential grounding in the world.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T14:06:14Z)
• Large Language Models are In-Context Semantic Reasoners rather than Symbolic Reasoners [75.85554779782048]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have excited the natural language and machine learning community over recent years. Despite of numerous successful applications, the underlying mechanism of such in-context capabilities still remains unclear. In this work, we hypothesize that the learned textitsemantics of language tokens do the most heavy lifting during the reasoning process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T07:33:34Z)
• 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)
• Provable Limitations of Acquiring Meaning from Ungrounded Form: What will Future Language Models Understand? [87.20342701232869]
  We investigate the abilities of ungrounded systems to acquire meaning. We study whether assertions enable a system to emulate representations preserving semantic relations like equivalence. We find that assertions enable semantic emulation if all expressions in the language are referentially transparent. However, if the language uses non-transparent patterns like variable binding, we show that emulation can become an uncomputable problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-22T01:00:17Z)

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.