Examining Long-Context Large Language Models for Environmental Review Document Comprehension

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.07321v2
• Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 03:33:58 GMT
• Title: Examining Long-Context Large Language Models for Environmental Review Document Comprehension
• Authors: Hung Phan, Anurag Acharya, Rounak Meyur, Sarthak Chaturvedi, Shivam Sharma, Mike Parker, Dan Nally, Ali Jannesari, Karl Pazdernik, Mahantesh Halappanavar, Sai Munikoti, Sameera Horawalavithana,
• Abstract summary: Long context and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) are two such methods that have recently gained popularity. In this work, we examine the benefits of both of these techniques by utilizing question answering (QA) task in a niche domain. We construct the NEPAQuAD1.0 benchmark to evaluate the performance of five long-context LLMs.
• Score: 10.299869088789363
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As LLMs become increasingly ubiquitous, researchers have tried various techniques to augment the knowledge provided to these models. Long context and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) are two such methods that have recently gained popularity. In this work, we examine the benefits of both of these techniques by utilizing question answering (QA) task in a niche domain. While the effectiveness of LLM-based QA systems has already been established at an acceptable level in popular domains such as trivia and literature, it has not often been established in niche domains that traditionally require specialized expertise. We construct the NEPAQuAD1.0 benchmark to evaluate the performance of five long-context LLMs -- Claude Sonnet, Gemini, GPT-4, Llama 3.1, and Mistral -- when answering questions originating from Environmental Impact Statements prepared by U.S. federal government agencies in accordance with the National Environmental Environmental Act (NEPA). We specifically measure the ability of LLMs to understand the nuances of legal, technical, and compliance-related information present in NEPA documents in different contextual scenarios. We test the LLMs' internal prior NEPA knowledge by providing questions without any context, as well as assess how LLMs synthesize the contextual information present in long NEPA documents to facilitate the question/answering task. We compare the performance of the models in handling different types of questions (e.g., problem-solving, divergent, etc.). Our results suggest that RAG powered models significantly outperform those provided with only the PDF context in terms of answer accuracy, regardless of the choice of the LLM. Our further analysis reveals that many models perform better answering closed type questions (Yes/No) than divergent and problem-solving questions.

Related papers

• Leveraging Online Olympiad-Level Math Problems for LLMs Training and Contamination-Resistant Evaluation [55.21013307734612]
  AoPS-Instruct is a dataset of more than 600,000 high-quality QA pairs. LiveAoPSBench is an evolving evaluation set with timestamps, derived from the latest forum data. Our work presents a scalable approach to creating and maintaining large-scale, high-quality datasets for advanced math reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-24T06:39:38Z)
• Knowledge Graphs, Large Language Models, and Hallucinations: An NLP Perspective [5.769786334333616]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized Natural Language Processing (NLP) based applications including automated text generation, question answering, and others. They face a significant challenge: hallucinations, where models produce plausible-sounding but factually incorrect responses. This paper discusses these open challenges covering state-of-the-art datasets and benchmarks as well as methods for knowledge integration and evaluating hallucinations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-21T16:09:05Z)
• Prompting Large Language Models with Knowledge Graphs for Question Answering Involving Long-tail Facts [50.06633829833144]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are effective in performing various NLP tasks, but struggle to handle tasks that require extensive, real-world knowledge. We propose a benchmark that requires knowledge of long-tail facts for answering the involved questions. Our experiments show that LLMs alone struggle with answering these questions, especially when the long-tail level is high or rich knowledge is required.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T15:10:20Z)
• A Survey on RAG Meeting LLMs: Towards Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models [71.25225058845324]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated revolutionary abilities in language understanding and generation. Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) can offer reliable and up-to-date external knowledge. RA-LLMs have emerged to harness external and authoritative knowledge bases, rather than relying on the model's internal knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T02:48:45Z)
• Can LLMs Grade Short-Answer Reading Comprehension Questions : An Empirical Study with a Novel Dataset [0.0]
  This paper investigates the potential for the newest version of Large Language Models (LLMs) to be used in short answer questions for formative assessments. It introduces a novel dataset of short answer reading comprehension questions, drawn from a set of reading assessments conducted with over 150 students in Ghana. The paper empirically evaluates how well various configurations of generative LLMs grade student short answer responses compared to expert human raters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T17:05:40Z)
• A Comprehensive Evaluation of Large Language Models on Legal Judgment Prediction [60.70089334782383]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated great potential for domain-specific applications. Recent disputes over GPT-4's law evaluation raise questions concerning their performance in real-world legal tasks. We design practical baseline solutions based on LLMs and test on the task of legal judgment prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-18T07:38:04Z)
• NuclearQA: A Human-Made Benchmark for Language Models for the Nuclear Domain [0.0]
  NuclearQA is a human-made benchmark of 100 questions to evaluate language models in the nuclear domain. We show how the mix of several types of questions makes our benchmark uniquely capable of evaluating models in the nuclear domain.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-17T01:27:20Z)
• FreshLLMs: Refreshing Large Language Models with Search Engine Augmentation [92.43001160060376]
  We study the factuality of large language models (LLMs) in the context of answering questions that test current world knowledge. We introduce FreshQA, a novel dynamic QA benchmark encompassing a diverse range of question and answer types. We benchmark a diverse array of both closed and open-source LLMs under a two-mode evaluation procedure that allows us to measure both correctness and hallucination. Motivated by these results, we present FreshPrompt, a simple few-shot prompting method that substantially boosts the performance of an LLM on FreshQA.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-05T00:04:12Z)
• Investigating the Factual Knowledge Boundary of Large Language Models with Retrieval Augmentation [109.8527403904657]
  We show that large language models (LLMs) possess unwavering confidence in their knowledge and cannot handle the conflict between internal and external knowledge well. Retrieval augmentation proves to be an effective approach in enhancing LLMs' awareness of knowledge boundaries. We propose a simple method to dynamically utilize supporting documents with our judgement strategy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T16:46:10Z)
• When Giant Language Brains Just Aren't Enough! Domain Pizzazz with Knowledge Sparkle Dust [15.484175299150904]
  This paper presents an empirical analysis aimed at bridging the gap in adapting large language models to practical use cases. We select the question answering (QA) task of insurance as a case study due to its challenge of reasoning. Based on the task we design a new model relied on LLMs which are empowered by additional knowledge extracted from insurance policy rulebooks and DBPedia.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-12T03:49:59Z)

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.