Using LLMs to Model the Beliefs and Preferences of Targeted Populations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2403.20252v1
• Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 15:58:46 GMT
• Title: Using LLMs to Model the Beliefs and Preferences of Targeted Populations
• Authors: Keiichi Namikoshi, Alex Filipowicz, David A. Shamma, Rumen Iliev, Candice L. Hogan, Nikos Arechiga,
• Abstract summary: We consider the problem of aligning a large language model (LLM) to model the preferences of a human population. Modeling the beliefs, preferences, and behaviors of a specific population can be useful for a variety of different applications.
• Score: 4.0849074543032105
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: We consider the problem of aligning a large language model (LLM) to model the preferences of a human population. Modeling the beliefs, preferences, and behaviors of a specific population can be useful for a variety of different applications, such as conducting simulated focus groups for new products, conducting virtual surveys, and testing behavioral interventions, especially for interventions that are expensive, impractical, or unethical. Existing work has had mixed success using LLMs to accurately model human behavior in different contexts. We benchmark and evaluate two well-known fine-tuning approaches and evaluate the resulting populations on their ability to match the preferences of real human respondents on a survey of preferences for battery electric vehicles (BEVs). We evaluate our models against their ability to match population-wide statistics as well as their ability to match individual responses, and we investigate the role of temperature in controlling the trade-offs between these two. Additionally, we propose and evaluate a novel loss term to improve model performance on responses that require a numeric response.

Related papers

• How Aligned are Generative Models to Humans in High-Stakes Decision-Making? [10.225573060836478]
  Large generative models (LMs) are increasingly being considered for high-stakes decision-making. This work considers how such models compare to humans and predictive AI models on a specific case of recidivism prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-20T19:00:59Z)
• Diverging Preferences: When do Annotators Disagree and do Models Know? [92.24651142187989]
  We develop a taxonomy of disagreement sources spanning 10 categories across four high-level classes. We find that the majority of disagreements are in opposition with standard reward modeling approaches. We develop methods for identifying diverging preferences to mitigate their influence on evaluation and training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-18T17:32:22Z)
• PersLLM: A Personified Training Approach for Large Language Models [66.16513246245401]
  We propose PersLLM, integrating psychology-grounded principles of personality: social practice, consistency, and dynamic development. We incorporate personality traits directly into the model parameters, enhancing the model's resistance to induction, promoting consistency, and supporting the dynamic evolution of personality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-17T08:13:22Z)
• Do Large Language Models Learn Human-Like Strategic Preferences? [0.0]
  LLMs learn to make human-like preference judgements in strategic scenarios. Solar and Mistral are shown to exhibit stable value-based preference consistent with humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-11T19:13:24Z)
• From Values to Opinions: Predicting Human Behaviors and Stances Using Value-Injected Large Language Models [10.520548925719565]
  We propose to use value-injected large language models (LLM) to predict opinions and behaviors. We conduct a series of experiments on four tasks to test the effectiveness of VIM. Results suggest that opinions and behaviors can be better predicted using value-injected LLMs than the baseline approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-27T02:18:10Z)
• Questioning the Survey Responses of Large Language Models [18.61486375469644]
  We critically examine language models' survey responses on the basis of the well-established American Community Survey by the U.S. Census Bureau. We find that models' responses are governed by ordering and labeling biases, leading to variations across models that do not persist after adjusting for systematic biases. Our findings suggest caution in treating models' survey responses as equivalent to those of human populations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-13T17:48:27Z)
• Are Neural Topic Models Broken? [81.15470302729638]
  We study the relationship between automated and human evaluation of topic models. We find that neural topic models fare worse in both respects compared to an established classical method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-28T14:38:50Z)
• Off-policy evaluation for learning-to-rank via interpolating the item-position model and the position-based model [83.83064559894989]
  A critical need for industrial recommender systems is the ability to evaluate recommendation policies offline, before deploying them to production. We develop a new estimator that mitigates the problems of the two most popular off-policy estimators for rankings. In particular, the new estimator, called INTERPOL, addresses the bias of a potentially misspecified position-based model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-15T17:22:30Z)
• Investigations of Performance and Bias in Human-AI Teamwork in Hiring [30.046502708053097]
  In AI-assisted decision-making, effective hybrid teamwork (human-AI) is not solely dependent on AI performance alone. We investigate how both a model's predictive performance and bias may transfer to humans in a recommendation-aided decision task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-21T17:58:07Z)
• Empirical Estimates on Hand Manipulation are Recoverable: A Step Towards Individualized and Explainable Robotic Support in Everyday Activities [80.37857025201036]
  Key challenge for robotic systems is to figure out the behavior of another agent. Processing correct inferences is especially challenging when (confounding) factors are not controlled experimentally. We propose equipping robots with the necessary tools to conduct observational studies on people.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-27T22:15:56Z)
• Adversarial Sample Enhanced Domain Adaptation: A Case Study on Predictive Modeling with Electronic Health Records [57.75125067744978]
  We propose a data augmentation method to facilitate domain adaptation. adversarially generated samples are used during domain adaptation. Results confirm the effectiveness of our method and the generality on different tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-13T03:20:20Z)

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.