Towards Logically Consistent Language Models via Probabilistic Reasoning
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.12843v1
- Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 12:23:57 GMT
- Title: Towards Logically Consistent Language Models via Probabilistic Reasoning
- Authors: Diego Calanzone, Stefano Teso, Antonio Vergari,
- Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) are a promising venue for natural language understanding and generation tasks.
LLMs are prone to generate non-factual information and to contradict themselves when prompted to reason about beliefs of the world.
We introduce a training objective that teaches a LLM to be consistent with external knowledge in the form of a set of facts and rules.
- Score: 14.317886666902822
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are a promising venue for natural language understanding and generation tasks. However, current LLMs are far from reliable: they are prone to generate non-factual information and, more crucially, to contradict themselves when prompted to reason about beliefs of the world. These problems are currently addressed with large scale fine-tuning or by delegating consistent reasoning to external tools. In this work, we strive for a middle ground and introduce a training objective based on principled probabilistic reasoning that teaches a LLM to be consistent with external knowledge in the form of a set of facts and rules. Fine-tuning with our loss on a limited set of facts enables our LLMs to be more logically consistent than previous baselines and allows them to extrapolate to unseen but semantically similar factual knowledge more systematically.
Related papers
- Behavioral Testing: Can Large Language Models Implicitly Resolve Ambiguous Entities? [27.10502683001428]
We analyze current state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) for their proficiency and consistency in applying their factual knowledge when prompted for entities under ambiguity.
Experiments reveal that LLMs perform poorly with ambiguous prompts, achieving only 80% accuracy.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-24T09:48:48Z) - LogicBench: Towards Systematic Evaluation of Logical Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models [52.03659714625452]
Recently developed large language models (LLMs) have been shown to perform remarkably well on a wide range of language understanding tasks.
But, can they really "reason" over the natural language?
This question has been receiving significant research attention and many reasoning skills such as commonsense, numerical, and qualitative have been studied.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-23T21:08:49Z) - LLMs' Reading Comprehension Is Affected by Parametric Knowledge and Struggles with Hypothetical Statements [59.71218039095155]
Task of reading comprehension (RC) provides a primary means to assess language models' natural language understanding (NLU) capabilities.
If the context aligns with the models' internal knowledge, it is hard to discern whether the models' answers stem from context comprehension or from internal information.
To address this issue, we suggest to use RC on imaginary data, based on fictitious facts and entities.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-09T13:08:56Z) - Faithfulness vs. Plausibility: On the (Un)Reliability of Explanations from Large Language Models [26.11408084129897]
Large Language Models (LLMs) are deployed as powerful tools for several natural language processing (NLP) applications.
Recent works show that modern LLMs can generate self-explanations (SEs), which elicit their intermediate reasoning steps for explaining their behavior.
We discuss the dichotomy between faithfulness and plausibility in SEs generated by LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-07T06:32:50Z) - Supervised Knowledge Makes Large Language Models Better In-context Learners [94.89301696512776]
Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit emerging in-context learning abilities through prompt engineering.
The challenge of improving the generalizability and factuality of LLMs in natural language understanding and question answering remains under-explored.
We propose a framework that enhances the reliability of LLMs as it: 1) generalizes out-of-distribution data, 2) elucidates how LLMs benefit from discriminative models, and 3) minimizes hallucinations in generative tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-26T07:24:46Z) - A Closer Look at the Self-Verification Abilities of Large Language Models in Logical Reasoning [73.77088902676306]
We take a closer look at the self-verification abilities of large language models (LLMs) in the context of logical reasoning.
Our main findings suggest that existing LLMs could struggle to identify fallacious reasoning steps accurately and may fall short of guaranteeing the validity of self-verification methods.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-14T07:13:10Z) - Learning To Teach Large Language Models Logical Reasoning [33.88499005859982]
Large language models (LLMs) have gained enormous attention from both academia and industry.
However, current LLMs still output unreliable content in practical reasoning tasks due to their inherent issues.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-13T14:53:06Z) - Towards LogiGLUE: A Brief Survey and A Benchmark for Analyzing Logical Reasoning Capabilities of Language Models [56.34029644009297]
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to overcome various limitations of formal Knowledge Representation (KR) systems.
LLMs excel most in abductive reasoning, followed by deductive reasoning, while they are least effective at inductive reasoning.
We study single-task training, multi-task training, and "chain-of-thought" knowledge distillation fine-tuning technique to assess the performance of model.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-02T01:00:50Z) - Limits for Learning with Language Models [4.20859414811553]
We show that large language models (LLMs) are unable to learn concepts beyond the first level of the Borel Hierarchy.
LLMs will continue to operate without formal guarantees on tasks that require entailments and deep linguistic understanding.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-21T12:11:31Z) - Rethinking with Retrieval: Faithful Large Language Model Inference [91.66406351103484]
We propose a novel post-processing approach, rethinking with retrieval (RR)
RR retrieves relevant external knowledge based on the reasoning steps obtained from the chain-of-thought prompting.
We evaluate the effectiveness of RR through extensive experiments with GPT-3 on three complex reasoning tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-12-31T22:35:34Z)
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.