Think Twice Before Trusting: Self-Detection for Large Language Models through Comprehensive Answer Reflection
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.09972v2
- Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 05:42:12 GMT
- Title: Think Twice Before Trusting: Self-Detection for Large Language Models through Comprehensive Answer Reflection
- Authors: Moxin Li, Wenjie Wang, Fuli Feng, Fengbin Zhu, Qifan Wang, Tat-Seng Chua,
- Abstract summary: We propose a novel self-detection paradigm that considers the comprehensive answer space beyond LLM-generated answers.
It thoroughly compares the trustability of multiple candidate answers to mitigate the over-trust in LLM-generated incorrect answers.
This framework can be seamlessly integrated with existing approaches for superior self-detection.
- Score: 90.71323430635593
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Self-detection for Large Language Model (LLM) seeks to evaluate the LLM output trustability by leveraging LLM's own capabilities, alleviating the output hallucination issue. However, existing self-detection approaches only retrospectively evaluate answers generated by LLM, typically leading to the over-trust in incorrectly generated answers. To tackle this limitation, we propose a novel self-detection paradigm that considers the comprehensive answer space beyond LLM-generated answers. It thoroughly compares the trustability of multiple candidate answers to mitigate the over-trust in LLM-generated incorrect answers. Building upon this paradigm, we introduce a two-step framework, which firstly instructs LLM to reflect and provide justifications for each candidate answer, and then aggregates the justifications for comprehensive target answer evaluation. This framework can be seamlessly integrated with existing approaches for superior self-detection. Extensive experiments on six datasets spanning three tasks demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed framework.
Related papers
- Cycles of Thought: Measuring LLM Confidence through Stable Explanations [53.15438489398938]
Large language models (LLMs) can reach and even surpass human-level accuracy on a variety of benchmarks, but their overconfidence in incorrect responses is still a well-documented failure mode.
We propose a framework for measuring an LLM's uncertainty with respect to the distribution of generated explanations for an answer.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-05T16:35:30Z) - Language Models can Evaluate Themselves via Probability Discrepancy [38.54454263880133]
We propose a new self-evaluation method ProbDiff for assessing the efficacy of various Large Language Models (LLMs)
It uniquely utilizes the LLMs being tested to compute the probability discrepancy between the initial response and its revised versions.
Our findings reveal that ProbDiff achieves results on par with those obtained from evaluations based on GPT-4.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-17T03:50:28Z) - Self-Contrast: Better Reflection Through Inconsistent Solving Perspectives [45.87069217634753]
Research indicates without external feedback, Large Language Model's intrinsic reflection is unstable.
Our investigation unveils that the key bottleneck is the quality of the self-evaluated feedback.
We advocate Self-Contrast: It adaptively explores diverse solving perspectives tailored to the request, contrasts the differences, and summarizes these discrepancies into a checklist which could be used to re-examine and eliminate discrepancies.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-04T00:32:33Z) - Effective Large Language Model Adaptation for Improved Grounding and Citation Generation [48.07830615309543]
This paper focuses on improving large language models (LLMs) by grounding their responses in retrieved passages and by providing citations.
We propose a new framework, AGREE, that improves the grounding from a holistic perspective.
Our framework tunes LLMs to selfground the claims in their responses and provide accurate citations to retrieved documents.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-16T03:22:25Z) - The ART of LLM Refinement: Ask, Refine, and Trust [85.75059530612882]
We propose a reasoning with refinement objective called ART: Ask, Refine, and Trust.
It asks necessary questions to decide when an LLM should refine its output.
It achieves a performance gain of +5 points over self-refinement baselines.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-14T07:26:32Z) - Sentiment Analysis through LLM Negotiations [58.67939611291001]
A standard paradigm for sentiment analysis is to rely on a singular LLM and makes the decision in a single round.
This paper introduces a multi-LLM negotiation framework for sentiment analysis.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-03T12:35:29Z) - Knowing What LLMs DO NOT Know: A Simple Yet Effective Self-Detection Method [36.24876571343749]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown great potential in Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks.
Recent literature reveals that LLMs generate nonfactual responses intermittently.
We propose a novel self-detection method to detect which questions that a LLM does not know that are prone to generate nonfactual results.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-27T06:22:14Z) - Quantifying Uncertainty in Answers from any Language Model and Enhancing
their Trustworthiness [16.35655151252159]
We introduce BSDetector, a method for detecting bad and speculative answers from a pretrained Large Language Model.
Our uncertainty quantification technique works for any LLM accessible only via a black-box API.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-08-30T17:53:25Z) - Check Your Facts and Try Again: Improving Large Language Models with
External Knowledge and Automated Feedback [127.75419038610455]
Large language models (LLMs) are able to generate human-like, fluent responses for many downstream tasks.
This paper proposes a LLM-Augmenter system, which augments a black-box LLM with a set of plug-and-play modules.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-24T18:48:43Z)
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.