Large Language Models Memorize Sensor Datasets! Implications on Human Activity Recognition Research

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.05900v1
• Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2024 19:38:27 GMT
• Title: Large Language Models Memorize Sensor Datasets! Implications on Human Activity Recognition Research
• Authors: Harish Haresamudram, Hrudhai Rajasekhar, Nikhil Murlidhar Shanbhogue, Thomas Ploetz,
• Abstract summary: We investigate whether Large Language Models (LLMs) have had access to standard Human Activity Recognition (HAR) datasets during training. Most contemporary LLMs are trained on virtually the entire (accessible) internet -- potentially including standard HAR datasets. For the Daphnet dataset in particular, GPT-4 is able to reproduce blocks of sensor readings.
• Score: 0.23982628363233693
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The astonishing success of Large Language Models (LLMs) in Natural Language Processing (NLP) has spurred their use in many application domains beyond text analysis, including wearable sensor-based Human Activity Recognition (HAR). In such scenarios, often sensor data are directly fed into an LLM along with text instructions for the model to perform activity classification. Seemingly remarkable results have been reported for such LLM-based HAR systems when they are evaluated on standard benchmarks from the field. Yet, we argue, care has to be taken when evaluating LLM-based HAR systems in such a traditional way. Most contemporary LLMs are trained on virtually the entire (accessible) internet -- potentially including standard HAR datasets. With that, it is not unlikely that LLMs actually had access to the test data used in such benchmark experiments.The resulting contamination of training data would render these experimental evaluations meaningless. In this paper we investigate whether LLMs indeed have had access to standard HAR datasets during training. We apply memorization tests to LLMs, which involves instructing the models to extend given snippets of data. When comparing the LLM-generated output to the original data we found a non-negligible amount of matches which suggests that the LLM under investigation seems to indeed have seen wearable sensor data from the benchmark datasets during training. For the Daphnet dataset in particular, GPT-4 is able to reproduce blocks of sensor readings. We report on our investigations and discuss potential implications on HAR research, especially with regards to reporting results on experimental evaluation

Related papers

• SELF-GUIDE: Better Task-Specific Instruction Following via Self-Synthetic Finetuning [70.21358720599821]
  Large language models (LLMs) hold the promise of solving diverse tasks when provided with appropriate natural language prompts. We propose SELF-GUIDE, a multi-stage mechanism in which we synthesize task-specific input-output pairs from the student LLM. We report an absolute improvement of approximately 15% for classification tasks and 18% for generation tasks in the benchmark's metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T04:41:58Z)
• DARG: Dynamic Evaluation of Large Language Models via Adaptive Reasoning Graph [70.79413606968814]
  We introduce Dynamic Evaluation of LLMs via Adaptive Reasoning Graph Evolvement (DARG) to dynamically extend current benchmarks with controlled complexity and diversity. Specifically, we first extract the reasoning graphs of data points in current benchmarks and then perturb the reasoning graphs to generate novel testing data. Such newly generated test samples can have different levels of complexity while maintaining linguistic diversity similar to the original benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T04:27:53Z)
• Elephants Never Forget: Memorization and Learning of Tabular Data in Large Language Models [21.10890310571397]
  We introduce a variety of different techniques to assess whether a language model has seen a dataset during training. We compare the few-shot learning performance of LLMs on datasets that were seen during training to the performance on datasets released after training. We find that LLMs perform better on datasets seen during training, indicating that memorization leads to overfitting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-09T10:58:21Z)
• Elephants Never Forget: Testing Language Models for Memorization of Tabular Data [21.912611415307644]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) can be applied to a diverse set of tasks, but the critical issues of data contamination and memorization are often glossed over. We introduce a variety of different techniques to assess the degrees of contamination, including statistical tests for conditional distribution modeling and four tests that identify memorization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-11T12:07:13Z)
• HARGPT: Are LLMs Zero-Shot Human Activity Recognizers? [9.414529772034985]
  We show that Large Language Models (LLMs) can comprehend raw IMU data and perform human activity recognition tasks in a zero-shot manner. We benchmark HARGPT on GPT4 using two public datasets of different inter-class similarities and compare various baselines both based on traditional machine learning and state-of-the-art deep classification models. Remarkably, LLMs successfully recognize human activities from raw IMU data and consistently outperform all the baselines on both datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-05T07:34:51Z)
• Evaluating Large Language Models as Virtual Annotators for Time-series Physical Sensing Data [5.092345761847645]
  We study whether the state-of-the-art (SOTA) LLMs can be used as virtual annotators for labeling time-series physical sensing data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-02T08:29:08Z)
• Large Language Models for Data Annotation: A Survey [49.8318827245266]
  The emergence of advanced Large Language Models (LLMs) presents an unprecedented opportunity to automate the complicated process of data annotation. This survey includes an in-depth taxonomy of data types that LLMs can annotate, a review of learning strategies for models utilizing LLM-generated annotations, and a detailed discussion of the primary challenges and limitations associated with using LLMs for data annotation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-21T00:44:04Z)
• Reflection-Tuning: Data Recycling Improves LLM Instruction-Tuning [79.32236399694077]
  Low-quality data in the training set are usually detrimental to instruction tuning. We propose a novel method, termed "reflection-tuning" This approach utilizes an oracle LLM to recycle the original training data by introspecting and enhancing the quality of instructions and responses in the data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-18T05:13:47Z)
• TRACE: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Continual Learning in Large Language Models [52.734140807634624]
  Aligned large language models (LLMs) demonstrate exceptional capabilities in task-solving, following instructions, and ensuring safety. Existing continual learning benchmarks lack sufficient challenge for leading aligned LLMs. We introduce TRACE, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate continual learning in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T16:38:49Z)
• MLLM-DataEngine: An Iterative Refinement Approach for MLLM [62.30753425449056]
  We propose a novel closed-loop system that bridges data generation, model training, and evaluation. Within each loop, the MLLM-DataEngine first analyze the weakness of the model based on the evaluation results. For targeting, we propose an Adaptive Bad-case Sampling module, which adjusts the ratio of different types of data. For quality, we resort to GPT-4 to generate high-quality data with each given data type.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-25T01:41:04Z)

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.