A Comprehensive Evaluation on Event Reasoning of Large Language Models
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.17513v1
- Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 16:28:34 GMT
- Title: A Comprehensive Evaluation on Event Reasoning of Large Language Models
- Authors: Zhengwei Tao, Zhi Jin, Yifan Zhang, Xiancai Chen, Xiaoying Bai, Yue Fang, Haiyan Zhao, Jia Li, Chongyang Tao,
- Abstract summary: How well LLMs accomplish event reasoning on various relations and reasoning paradigms remains unknown.
We introduce a novel benchmark EV2 for EValuation of EVent reasoning.
We find that LLMs have abilities to accomplish event reasoning but their performances are far from satisfactory.
- Score: 50.117736215593894
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Event reasoning is a fundamental ability that underlies many applications. It requires event schema knowledge to perform global reasoning and needs to deal with the diversity of the inter-event relations and the reasoning paradigms. How well LLMs accomplish event reasoning on various relations and reasoning paradigms remains unknown. To mitigate this disparity, we comprehensively evaluate the abilities of event reasoning of LLMs. We introduce a novel benchmark EV2 for EValuation of EVent reasoning. EV2 consists of two levels of evaluation of schema and instance and is comprehensive in relations and reasoning paradigms. We conduct extensive experiments on EV2. We find that LLMs have abilities to accomplish event reasoning but their performances are far from satisfactory. We also notice the imbalance of event reasoning abilities in LLMs. Besides, LLMs have event schema knowledge, however, they're not aligned with humans on how to utilize the knowledge. Based on these findings, we introduce two methods to guide the LLMs to utilize the event schema knowledge. Both methods achieve improvements.
Related papers
- Untangle the KNOT: Interweaving Conflicting Knowledge and Reasoning Skills in Large Language Models [51.72963030032491]
Knowledge documents for large language models (LLMs) may conflict with the memory of LLMs due to outdated or incorrect knowledge.
We construct a new dataset, dubbed KNOT, for knowledge conflict resolution examination in the form of question answering.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-04T16:40:11Z) - FAC$^2$E: Better Understanding Large Language Model Capabilities by
Dissociating Language and Cognition [57.747888532651]
Large language models (LLMs) are primarily evaluated by overall performance on various text understanding and generation tasks.
We present FAC$2$E, a framework for Fine-grAined and Cognition-grounded LLMs' Capability Evaluation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-29T21:05:37Z) - GTBench: Uncovering the Strategic Reasoning Limitations of LLMs via Game-Theoretic Evaluations [87.99872683336395]
Large Language Models (LLMs) are integrated into critical real-world applications.
This paper evaluates LLMs' reasoning abilities in competitive environments.
We first propose GTBench, a language-driven environment composing 10 widely recognized tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-19T18:23:36Z) - When LLMs Meet Cunning Texts: A Fallacy Understanding Benchmark for Large Language Models [59.84769254832941]
We propose a FaLlacy Understanding Benchmark (FLUB) containing cunning texts that are easy for humans to understand but difficult for models to grasp.
Specifically, the cunning texts that FLUB focuses on mainly consist of the tricky, humorous, and misleading texts collected from the real internet environment.
Based on FLUB, we investigate the performance of multiple representative and advanced LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-16T22:12:53Z) - A & B == B & A: Triggering Logical Reasoning Failures in Large Language
Models [65.86149763739141]
We introduce LogicAsker, an automatic approach that comprehensively evaluates and improves the logical reasoning abilities of LLMs.
We evaluate LogicAsker on six widely deployed LLMs, including GPT-3, ChatGPT, GPT-4, Bard, Vicuna, and Guanaco.
The results show that test cases from LogicAsker can find logical reasoning failures in different LLMs with a rate of 25% - 94%.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-01T13:53:53Z) - 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) - Are LLMs the Master of All Trades? : Exploring Domain-Agnostic Reasoning
Skills of LLMs [0.0]
This study aims to investigate the performance of large language models (LLMs) on different reasoning tasks.
My findings indicate that LLMs excel at analogical and moral reasoning, yet struggle to perform as proficiently on spatial reasoning tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-03-22T22:53:44Z)
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.