Evaluating Theory of (an uncertain) Mind: Predicting the Uncertain Beliefs of Others in Conversation Forecasting

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.14986v1
• Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2024 13:05:25 GMT
• Title: Evaluating Theory of (an uncertain) Mind: Predicting the Uncertain Beliefs of Others in Conversation Forecasting
• Authors: Anthony Sicilia, Malihe Alikhani,
• Abstract summary: We propose a new suite of tasks, challenging language models (LMs) to model the uncertainty of others in dialogue. Uniquely, we view interlocutors themselves as forecasters, asking an LM to predict the uncertainty of the interlocutors. While LMs can explain up to 7% variance in the uncertainty of others, we highlight the difficulty of the tasks and room for future work.
• Score: 29.892041865029803
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Typically, when evaluating Theory of Mind, we consider the beliefs of others to be binary: held or not held. But what if someone is unsure about their own beliefs? How can we quantify this uncertainty? We propose a new suite of tasks, challenging language models (LMs) to model the uncertainty of others in dialogue. We design these tasks around conversation forecasting, wherein an agent forecasts an unobserved outcome to a conversation. Uniquely, we view interlocutors themselves as forecasters, asking an LM to predict the uncertainty of the interlocutors (a probability). We experiment with re-scaling methods, variance reduction strategies, and demographic context, for this regression task, conducting experiments on three dialogue corpora (social, negotiation, task-oriented) with eight LMs. While LMs can explain up to 7% variance in the uncertainty of others, we highlight the difficulty of the tasks and room for future work, especially in practical applications, like anticipating ``false

Related papers

• SimpleToM: Exposing the Gap between Explicit ToM Inference and Implicit ToM Application in LLMs [72.06808538971487]
  We test whether large language models (LLMs) can implicitly apply a "theory of mind" (ToM) to predict behavior. We create a new dataset, SimpleTom, containing stories with three questions that test different degrees of ToM reasoning. To our knowledge, SimpleToM is the first dataset to explore downstream reasoning requiring knowledge of mental states in realistic scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T15:15:00Z)
• Eliciting Uncertainty in Chain-of-Thought to Mitigate Bias against Forecasting Harmful User Behaviors [29.892041865029803]
  Conversation forecasting tasks a model with predicting the outcome of an unfolding conversation. It can be applied in social media moderation to predict harmful user behaviors before they occur. This paper explores what extent model uncertainty can be used as a tool to mitigate potential biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T15:07:53Z)
• Rel-A.I.: An Interaction-Centered Approach To Measuring Human-LM Reliance [73.19687314438133]
  We study how reliance is affected by contextual features of an interaction. We find that contextual characteristics significantly affect human reliance behavior. Our results show that calibration and language quality alone are insufficient in evaluating the risks of human-LM interactions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-10T18:00:05Z)
• Do Large Language Models Exhibit Cognitive Dissonance? Studying the Difference Between Revealed Beliefs and Stated Answers [13.644277507363036]
  We investigate whether these abilities are measurable outside of tailored prompting and MCQ. Our findings suggest that the Revealed Belief of LLMs significantly differs from their Stated Answer. As text completion is at the core of LLMs, these results suggest that common evaluation methods may only provide a partial picture.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-21T08:56:35Z)
• "I'm Not Sure, But...": Examining the Impact of Large Language Models' Uncertainty Expression on User Reliance and Trust [51.542856739181474]
  We show how different natural language expressions of uncertainty impact participants' reliance, trust, and overall task performance. We find that first-person expressions decrease participants' confidence in the system and tendency to agree with the system's answers, while increasing participants' accuracy. Our findings suggest that using natural language expressions of uncertainty may be an effective approach for reducing overreliance on LLMs, but that the precise language used matters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-01T16:43:55Z)
• Deal, or no deal (or who knows)? Forecasting Uncertainty in Conversations using Large Language Models [45.41542983671774]
  How well can language models represent inherent uncertainty in conversations? We propose FortUne Dial, an expansion of the long-standing "conversation forecasting" task. We study two ways in which language models potentially represent outcome uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-05T18:39:47Z)
• Clarify When Necessary: Resolving Ambiguity Through Interaction with LMs [58.620269228776294]
  We propose a task-agnostic framework for resolving ambiguity by asking users clarifying questions. We evaluate systems across three NLP applications: question answering, machine translation and natural language inference. We find that intent-sim is robust, demonstrating improvements across a wide range of NLP tasks and LMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T00:18:50Z)
• MindDial: Belief Dynamics Tracking with Theory-of-Mind Modeling for Situated Neural Dialogue Generation [62.44907105496227]
  MindDial is a novel conversational framework that can generate situated free-form responses with theory-of-mind modeling. We introduce an explicit mind module that can track the speaker's belief and the speaker's prediction of the listener's belief. Our framework is applied to both prompting and fine-tuning-based models, and is evaluated across scenarios involving both common ground alignment and negotiation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-27T07:24:32Z)
• Beyond Distributional Hypothesis: Let Language Models Learn Meaning-Text Correspondence [45.9949173746044]
  We show that large-size pre-trained language models (PLMs) do not satisfy the logical negation property (LNP) We propose a novel intermediate training task, names meaning-matching, designed to directly learn a meaning-text correspondence. We find that the task enables PLMs to learn lexical semantic information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-08T08:37:36Z)
• Empirical Estimates on Hand Manipulation are Recoverable: A Step Towards Individualized and Explainable Robotic Support in Everyday Activities [80.37857025201036]
  Key challenge for robotic systems is to figure out the behavior of another agent. Processing correct inferences is especially challenging when (confounding) factors are not controlled experimentally. We propose equipping robots with the necessary tools to conduct observational studies on people.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-27T22:15:56Z)
• Getting a CLUE: A Method for Explaining Uncertainty Estimates [30.367995696223726]
  We propose a novel method for interpreting uncertainty estimates from differentiable probabilistic models. Our method, Counterfactual Latent Uncertainty Explanations (CLUE), indicates how to change an input, while keeping it on the data manifold.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-11T21:53:15Z)

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.