DeFine: Enhancing LLM Decision-Making with Factor Profiles and Analogical Reasoning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.01772v1
• Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2024 17:29:34 GMT
• Title: DeFine: Enhancing LLM Decision-Making with Factor Profiles and Analogical Reasoning
• Authors: Yebowen Hu, Xiaoyang Wang, Wenlin Yao, Yiming Lu, Daoan Zhang, Hassan Foroosh, Dong Yu, Fei Liu,
• Abstract summary: We introduce DeFine, a new framework that constructs probabilistic factor profiles from complex scenarios. DeFine then integrates these profiles with analogical reasoning, leveraging insights from similar past experiences. This approach is particularly useful in fields such as medical consultations, negotiations, and political debates.
• Score: 35.9909472797192
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: LLMs are ideal for decision-making due to their ability to reason over long contexts and identify critical factors. However, challenges arise when processing transcripts of spoken speech describing complex scenarios. These transcripts often contain ungrammatical or incomplete sentences, repetitions, hedging, and vagueness. For example, during a company's earnings call, an executive might project a positive revenue outlook to reassure investors, despite significant uncertainty regarding future earnings. It is crucial for LLMs to incorporate this uncertainty systematically when making decisions. In this paper, we introduce DeFine, a new framework that constructs probabilistic factor profiles from complex scenarios. DeFine then integrates these profiles with analogical reasoning, leveraging insights from similar past experiences to guide LLMs in making critical decisions in novel situations. Our framework separates the tasks of quantifying uncertainty in complex scenarios and incorporating it into LLM decision-making. This approach is particularly useful in fields such as medical consultations, negotiations, and political debates, where making decisions under uncertainty is vital.

Related papers

• Distributive Fairness in Large Language Models: Evaluating Alignment with Human Values [13.798198972161657]
  A number of societal problems involve the distribution of resources, where fairness, along with economic efficiency, play a critical role in the desirability of outcomes. This paper examines whether large language models (LLMs) adhere to fundamental fairness concepts and investigate their alignment with human preferences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-01T04:24:47Z)
• STRUX: An LLM for Decision-Making with Structured Explanations [17.518955158367305]
  We introduce a new framework called STRUX, which enhances LLM decision-making by providing structured explanations. STRUX begins by distilling lengthy information into a concise table of key facts. It then employs a series of self-reflection steps to determine which of these facts are pivotal, categorizing them as either favorable or adverse in relation to a specific decision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T14:01:22Z)
• 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)
• Evaluating Interventional Reasoning Capabilities of Large Language Models [58.52919374786108]
  Large language models (LLMs) are used to automate decision-making tasks. In this paper, we evaluate whether LLMs can accurately update their knowledge of a data-generating process in response to an intervention. We create benchmarks that span diverse causal graphs (e.g., confounding, mediation) and variable types. These benchmarks allow us to isolate the ability of LLMs to accurately predict changes resulting from their ability to memorize facts or find other shortcuts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-08T14:15:56Z)
• FinLlama: Financial Sentiment Classification for Algorithmic Trading Applications [2.2661367844871854]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) can be used in this context, but they are not finance-specific and tend to require significant computational resources. We introduce a novel approach based on the Llama 2 7B foundational model, in order to benefit from its generative nature and comprehensive language manipulation. This is achieved by fine-tuning the Llama2 7B model on a small portion of supervised financial sentiment analysis data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-18T22:11:00Z)
• Reasoning over Uncertain Text by Generative Large Language Models [18.983753573277596]
  This paper considers the challenges Large Language Models (LLMs) face when reasoning over text that includes information involving uncertainty explicitly quantified via probability values. We introduce the Bayesian Linguistic Inference dataset (BLInD), a new dataset designed to test the probabilistic reasoning capabilities of LLMs. We present several prompting strategies that map the problem to different formal representations, including Python code, probabilistic algorithms, and probabilistic logical programming.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-14T23:05:44Z)
• Sentiment Analysis through LLM Negotiations [58.67939611291001]
  A standard paradigm for sentiment analysis is to rely on a singular LLM and makes the decision in a single round. This paper introduces a multi-LLM negotiation framework for sentiment analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:35:29Z)
• 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)
• Survey on Factuality in Large Language Models: Knowledge, Retrieval and Domain-Specificity [61.54815512469125]
  This survey addresses the crucial issue of factuality in Large Language Models (LLMs) As LLMs find applications across diverse domains, the reliability and accuracy of their outputs become vital.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T14:18:03Z)

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.