Do LLMs have Consistent Values?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.12878v3
• Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2024 07:29:29 GMT
• Title: Do LLMs have Consistent Values?
• Authors: Naama Rozen, Liat Bezalel, Gal Elidan, Amir Globerson, Ella Daniel,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLM) technology is constantly improving towards human-like dialogue. Values are a basic driving force underlying human behavior, but little research has been done to study the values exhibited in text generated by LLMs. We ask whether LLMs exhibit the same value structure that has been demonstrated in humans, including the ranking of values, and correlation between values.
• Score: 27.58375296918161
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLM) technology is constantly improving towards human-like dialogue. Values are a basic driving force underlying human behavior, but little research has been done to study the values exhibited in text generated by LLMs. Here we study this question by turning to the rich literature on value structure in psychology. We ask whether LLMs exhibit the same value structure that has been demonstrated in humans, including the ranking of values, and correlation between values. We show that the results of this analysis depend on how the LLM is prompted, and that under a particular prompting strategy (referred to as "Value Anchoring") the agreement with human data is quite compelling. Our results serve both to improve our understanding of values in LLMs, as well as introduce novel methods for assessing consistency in LLM responses.

Related papers

• Measuring Human and AI Values based on Generative Psychometrics with Large Language Models [13.795641564238434]
  In recent advances in AI, large language models (LLMs) have emerged as both tools and subjects of value measurement. This work introduces Generative Psychometrics for Values (GPV), a data-driven value measurement paradigm grounded in text-revealed selective perceptions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-18T16:26:22Z)
• How Well Do LLMs Represent Values Across Cultures? Empirical Analysis of LLM Responses Based on Hofstede Cultural Dimensions [9.275967682881944]
  It is critical to understand whether Large Language Models showcase different values to the user based on the stereotypical values of a user's known country. We prompt different LLMs with a series of advice requests based on 5 Hofstede Cultural Dimensions. We found that LLMs can differentiate between one side of a value and another, as well as understand that countries have differing values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-21T00:58:01Z)
• Decompose and Aggregate: A Step-by-Step Interpretable Evaluation Framework [75.81096662788254]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are scalable and economical evaluators. The question of how reliable these evaluators are has emerged as a crucial research question. We propose Decompose and Aggregate, which breaks down the evaluation process into different stages based on pedagogical practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-24T08:12:30Z)
• Beyond Human Norms: Unveiling Unique Values of Large Language Models through Interdisciplinary Approaches [69.73783026870998]
  This work proposes a novel framework, ValueLex, to reconstruct Large Language Models' unique value system from scratch. Based on Lexical Hypothesis, ValueLex introduces a generative approach to elicit diverse values from 30+ LLMs. We identify three core value dimensions, Competence, Character, and Integrity, each with specific subdimensions, revealing that LLMs possess a structured, albeit non-human, value system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-19T09:44:51Z)
• Assessing LLMs for Moral Value Pluralism [2.860608352191896]
  We utilize a Recognizing Value Resonance (RVR) NLP model to identify World Values Survey (WVS) values that resonate and conflict with a given passage of text. We find that LLMs exhibit several Western-centric value biases. Our results highlight value misalignment and age groups, and a need for social science informed technological solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-08T16:18:15Z)
• Evaluating Large Language Models at Evaluating Instruction Following [54.49567482594617]
  We introduce a challenging meta-evaluation benchmark, LLMBar, designed to test the ability of an LLM evaluator in discerning instruction-following outputs. We discover that different evaluators exhibit distinct performance on LLMBar and even the highest-scoring ones have substantial room for improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T16:38:11Z)
• 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)
• A Survey on Evaluation of Large Language Models [87.60417393701331]
  Large language models (LLMs) are gaining increasing popularity in both academia and industry. This paper focuses on three key dimensions: what to evaluate, where to evaluate, and how to evaluate.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-06T16:28:35Z)
• Heterogeneous Value Alignment Evaluation for Large Language Models [91.96728871418]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have made it crucial to align their values with those of humans. We propose a Heterogeneous Value Alignment Evaluation (HVAE) system to assess the success of aligning LLMs with heterogeneous values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T02:34:20Z)

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.