A Survey on the Honesty of Large Language Models
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.18786v1
- Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 14:34:54 GMT
- Title: A Survey on the Honesty of Large Language Models
- Authors: Siheng Li, Cheng Yang, Taiqiang Wu, Chufan Shi, Yuji Zhang, Xinyu Zhu, Zesen Cheng, Deng Cai, Mo Yu, Lemao Liu, Jie Zhou, Yujiu Yang, Ngai Wong, Xixin Wu, Wai Lam,
- Abstract summary: Honesty is a fundamental principle for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values.
Despite promising, current LLMs still exhibit significant dishonest behaviors.
- Score: 115.8458596738659
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Honesty is a fundamental principle for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human values, requiring these models to recognize what they know and don't know and be able to faithfully express their knowledge. Despite promising, current LLMs still exhibit significant dishonest behaviors, such as confidently presenting wrong answers or failing to express what they know. In addition, research on the honesty of LLMs also faces challenges, including varying definitions of honesty, difficulties in distinguishing between known and unknown knowledge, and a lack of comprehensive understanding of related research. To address these issues, we provide a survey on the honesty of LLMs, covering its clarification, evaluation approaches, and strategies for improvement. Moreover, we offer insights for future research, aiming to inspire further exploration in this important area.
Related papers
- To Know or Not To Know? Analyzing Self-Consistency of Large Language Models under Ambiguity [27.10502683001428]
This paper focuses on entity type ambiguity, analyzing the proficiency and consistency of state-of-the-art LLMs in applying factual knowledge when prompted with ambiguous entities.
Experiments reveal that LLMs struggle with choosing the correct entity reading, achieving an average accuracy of only 85%, and as low as 75% with underspecified prompts.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-24T09:48:48Z) - Understanding the Relationship between Prompts and Response Uncertainty in Large Language Models [55.332004960574004]
Large language models (LLMs) are widely used in decision-making, but their reliability, especially in critical tasks like healthcare, is not well-established.
This paper investigates how the uncertainty of responses generated by LLMs relates to the information provided in the input prompt.
We propose a prompt-response concept model that explains how LLMs generate responses and helps understand the relationship between prompts and response uncertainty.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-20T11:19:58Z) - BeHonest: Benchmarking Honesty in Large Language Models [23.192389530727713]
We introduce BeHonest, a pioneering benchmark specifically designed to assess honesty in Large Language Models.
BeHonest evaluates three essential aspects of honesty: awareness of knowledge boundaries, avoidance of deceit, and consistency in responses.
Our findings indicate that there is still significant room for improvement in the honesty of LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-19T06:46:59Z) - Alignment for Honesty [105.72465407518325]
Recent research has made significant strides in aligning large language models (LLMs) with helpfulness and harmlessness.
In this paper, we argue for the importance of alignment for emphhonesty, ensuring that LLMs proactively refuse to answer questions when they lack knowledge.
We address these challenges by first establishing a precise problem definition and defining honesty'' inspired by the Analects of Confucius.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-12T06:10:42Z) - Examining LLMs' Uncertainty Expression Towards Questions Outside
Parametric Knowledge [35.067234242461545]
Large language models (LLMs) express uncertainty in situations where they lack sufficient parametric knowledge to generate reasonable responses.
This work aims to systematically investigate LLMs' behaviors in such situations, emphasizing the trade-off between honesty and helpfulness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-16T10:02:40Z) - RECALL: A Benchmark for LLMs Robustness against External Counterfactual
Knowledge [69.79676144482792]
This study aims to evaluate the ability of LLMs to distinguish reliable information from external knowledge.
Our benchmark consists of two tasks, Question Answering and Text Generation, and for each task, we provide models with a context containing counterfactual information.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-14T13:24:19Z) - Challenges and Contributing Factors in the Utilization of Large Language
Models (LLMs) [10.039589841455136]
This review explores the issue of domain specificity, where large language models (LLMs) may struggle to provide precise answers to specialized questions within niche fields.
It's suggested to diversify training data, fine-tune models, enhance transparency and interpretability, and incorporate ethics and fairness training.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-20T08:13:36Z) - 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) - Do Large Language Models Know What They Don't Know? [74.65014158544011]
Large language models (LLMs) have a wealth of knowledge that allows them to excel in various Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks.
Despite their vast knowledge, LLMs are still limited by the amount of information they can accommodate and comprehend.
This study aims to evaluate LLMs' self-knowledge by assessing their ability to identify unanswerable or unknowable questions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-29T15:30:13Z)
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.