Log Probabilities Are a Reliable Estimate of Semantic Plausibility in Base and Instruction-Tuned Language Models
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.14859v2
- Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 11:25:48 GMT
- Title: Log Probabilities Are a Reliable Estimate of Semantic Plausibility in Base and Instruction-Tuned Language Models
- Authors: Carina Kauf, Emmanuele Chersoni, Alessandro Lenci, Evelina Fedorenko, Anna A. Ivanova,
- Abstract summary: We evaluate the effectiveness of LogProbs and basic prompting to measure semantic plausibility.
We find that LogProbs offers a more reliable measure of semantic plausibility than direct zero-shot prompting.
We conclude that, even in the era of prompt-based evaluations, LogProbs constitute a useful metric of semantic plausibility.
- Score: 50.15455336684986
- License:
- Abstract: Semantic plausibility (e.g. knowing that "the actor won the award" is more likely than "the actor won the battle") serves as an effective proxy for general world knowledge. Language models (LMs) capture vast amounts of world knowledge by learning distributional patterns in text, accessible via log probabilities (LogProbs) they assign to plausible vs. implausible outputs. The new generation of instruction-tuned LMs can now also provide explicit estimates of plausibility via prompting. Here, we evaluate the effectiveness of LogProbs and basic prompting to measure semantic plausibility, both in single-sentence minimal pairs (Experiment 1) and short context-dependent scenarios (Experiment 2). We find that (i) in both base and instruction-tuned LMs, LogProbs offers a more reliable measure of semantic plausibility than direct zero-shot prompting, which yields inconsistent and often poor results; (ii) instruction-tuning generally does not alter the sensitivity of LogProbs to semantic plausibility (although sometimes decreases it); (iii) across models, context mostly modulates LogProbs in expected ways, as measured by three novel metrics of context-sensitive plausibility and their match to explicit human plausibility judgments. We conclude that, even in the era of prompt-based evaluations, LogProbs constitute a useful metric of semantic plausibility, both in base and instruction-tuned LMs.
Related papers
- What Are the Odds? Language Models Are Capable of Probabilistic Reasoning [23.487484744911995]
We focus on evaluating the probabilistic reasoning capabilities of language models (LMs) using idealized and real-world statistical distributions.
We perform a systematic evaluation of state-of-the-art LMs on three tasks: estimating percentiles, drawing samples, and calculating probabilities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-18T17:51:24Z) - LINC: A Neurosymbolic Approach for Logical Reasoning by Combining
Language Models with First-Order Logic Provers [60.009969929857704]
Logical reasoning is an important task for artificial intelligence with potential impacts on science, mathematics, and society.
In this work, we reformulating such tasks as modular neurosymbolic programming, which we call LINC.
We observe significant performance gains on FOLIO and a balanced subset of ProofWriter for three different models in nearly all experimental conditions we evaluate.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-23T17:58:40Z) - QA-NatVer: Question Answering for Natural Logic-based Fact Verification [11.002475880349452]
We propose to use question answering to predict natural logic operators.
In a few-shot setting on FEVER, our approach outperforms the best baseline by $4.3$ accuracy points.
A human evaluation indicates that our approach produces more plausible with fewer erroneous natural logic operators than previous natural logic-based systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-22T06:27:31Z) - Prototype-based Aleatoric Uncertainty Quantification for Cross-modal
Retrieval [139.21955930418815]
Cross-modal Retrieval methods build similarity relations between vision and language modalities by jointly learning a common representation space.
However, the predictions are often unreliable due to the Aleatoric uncertainty, which is induced by low-quality data, e.g., corrupt images, fast-paced videos, and non-detailed texts.
We propose a novel Prototype-based Aleatoric Uncertainty Quantification (PAU) framework to provide trustworthy predictions by quantifying the uncertainty arisen from the inherent data ambiguity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-29T09:41:19Z) - HyPoradise: An Open Baseline for Generative Speech Recognition with
Large Language Models [81.56455625624041]
We introduce the first open-source benchmark to utilize external large language models (LLMs) for ASR error correction.
The proposed benchmark contains a novel dataset, HyPoradise (HP), encompassing more than 334,000 pairs of N-best hypotheses.
LLMs with reasonable prompt and its generative capability can even correct those tokens that are missing in N-best list.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-27T14:44:10Z) - Evaluating statistical language models as pragmatic reasoners [39.72348730045737]
We evaluate the capacity of large language models to infer meanings of pragmatic utterances.
We find that LLMs can derive context-grounded, human-like distributions over the interpretations of several complex pragmatic utterances.
Results inform the inferential capacity of statistical language models, and their use in pragmatic and semantic parsing applications.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-01T18:22:10Z) - MURMUR: Modular Multi-Step Reasoning for Semi-Structured Data-to-Text
Generation [102.20036684996248]
We propose MURMUR, a neuro-symbolic modular approach to text generation from semi-structured data with multi-step reasoning.
We conduct experiments on two data-to-text generation tasks like WebNLG and LogicNLG.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-12-16T17:36:23Z) - Logical Satisfiability of Counterfactuals for Faithful Explanations in
NLI [60.142926537264714]
We introduce the methodology of Faithfulness-through-Counterfactuals.
It generates a counterfactual hypothesis based on the logical predicates expressed in the explanation.
It then evaluates if the model's prediction on the counterfactual is consistent with that expressed logic.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-05-25T03:40:59Z)
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.