Characterizing Context Influence and Hallucination in Summarization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.03026v1
• Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2024 22:19:28 GMT
• Title: Characterizing Context Influence and Hallucination in Summarization
• Authors: James Flemings, Wanrong Zhang, Bo Jiang, Zafar Takhirov, Murali Annavaram,
• Abstract summary: We study the influence and hallucination of contextual information during summarization. We show that context influence gives a lower bound of the private information leakage of CID.
• Score: 10.597854898147313
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Although Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable performance in numerous downstream tasks, their ubiquity has raised two significant concerns. One is that LLMs can hallucinate by generating content that contradicts relevant contextual information; the other is that LLMs can inadvertently leak private information due to input regurgitation. Many prior works have extensively studied each concern independently, but none have investigated them simultaneously. Furthermore, auditing the influence of provided context during open-ended generation with a privacy emphasis is understudied. To this end, we comprehensively characterize the influence and hallucination of contextual information during summarization. We introduce a definition for context influence and Context-Influence Decoding (CID), and then we show that amplifying the context (by factoring out prior knowledge) and the context being out of distribution with respect to prior knowledge increases the context's influence on an LLM. Moreover, we show that context influence gives a lower bound of the private information leakage of CID. We corroborate our analytical findings with experimental evaluations that show improving the F1 ROGUE-L score on CNN-DM for LLaMA 3 by $\textbf{10}$% over regular decoding also leads to $\textbf{1.5x}$ more influence by the context. Moreover, we empirically evaluate how context influence and hallucination are affected by (1) model capacity, (2) context size, (3) the length of the current response, and (4) different token $n$-grams of the context. Our code can be accessed here: https://github.com/james-flemings/context_influence.

Related papers

• 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)
• When Context Leads but Parametric Memory Follows in Large Language Models [4.567122178196834]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable progress in leveraging diverse knowledge sources. This study investigates how nine widely used LLMs allocate knowledge between local context and global parameters when answering open-ended questions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-13T00:03:19Z)
• QUITO: Accelerating Long-Context Reasoning through Query-Guided Context Compression [37.08536175557748]
  In this paper, we introduce a novel Query-gUIded aTtention cOmpression (QUITO) method to filter useless information. Specifically, we take a trigger token to calculate the attention distribution of the context in response to the question. We evaluate the QUITO using two widely-used datasets, namely, NaturalQuestions and ASQA.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-01T04:28:38Z)
• LLMs' Reading Comprehension Is Affected by Parametric Knowledge and Struggles with Hypothetical Statements [59.71218039095155]
  Task of reading comprehension (RC) provides a primary means to assess language models' natural language understanding (NLU) capabilities. If the context aligns with the models' internal knowledge, it is hard to discern whether the models' answers stem from context comprehension or from internal information. To address this issue, we suggest to use RC on imaginary data, based on fictitious facts and entities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-09T13:08:56Z)
• Blinded by Generated Contexts: How Language Models Merge Generated and Retrieved Contexts When Knowledge Conflicts? [45.233517779029334]
  We identify whether responses are attributed to generated or retrieved contexts. Experiments reveal a significant bias in several LLMs to favor generated contexts, even when they provide incorrect information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-22T12:54:04Z)
• Knowledge Verification to Nip Hallucination in the Bud [69.79051730580014]
  We demonstrate the feasibility of mitigating hallucinations by verifying and minimizing the inconsistency between external knowledge present in the alignment data and the intrinsic knowledge embedded within foundation LLMs. We propose a novel approach called Knowledge Consistent Alignment (KCA), which employs a well-aligned LLM to automatically formulate assessments based on external knowledge. We demonstrate the superior efficacy of KCA in reducing hallucinations across six benchmarks, utilizing foundation LLMs of varying backbones and scales.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-19T15:39:49Z)
• Enhancing Uncertainty-Based Hallucination Detection with Stronger Focus [99.33091772494751]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained significant popularity for their impressive performance across diverse fields. LLMs are prone to hallucinate untruthful or nonsensical outputs that fail to meet user expectations. We propose a novel reference-free, uncertainty-based method for detecting hallucinations in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-22T08:39:17Z)
• Exploring the Jungle of Bias: Political Bias Attribution in Language Models via Dependency Analysis [86.49858739347412]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have sparked intense debate regarding the prevalence of bias in these models and its mitigation. We propose a prompt-based method for the extraction of confounding and mediating attributes which contribute to the decision process. We find that the observed disparate treatment can at least in part be attributed to confounding and mitigating attributes and model misalignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T00:02:25Z)
• Improving Open Information Extraction with Large Language Models: A Study on Demonstration Uncertainty [52.72790059506241]
  Open Information Extraction (OIE) task aims at extracting structured facts from unstructured text. Despite the potential of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT as a general task solver, they lag behind state-of-the-art (supervised) methods in OIE tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-07T01:35:24Z)
• Towards Understanding In-Context Learning with Contrastive Demonstrations and Saliency Maps [7.342347950764399]
  We investigate the role of various demonstration components in the in-context learning performance of large language models (LLMs) Specifically, we explore the impacts of ground-truth labels, input distribution, and complementary explanations, particularly when these are altered or perturbed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-11T07:03:29Z)
• Context-faithful Prompting for Large Language Models [51.194410884263135]
  Large language models (LLMs) encode parametric knowledge about world facts. Their reliance on parametric knowledge may cause them to overlook contextual cues, leading to incorrect predictions in context-sensitive NLP tasks. We assess and enhance LLMs' contextual faithfulness in two aspects: knowledge conflict and prediction with abstention.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-20T17:54:58Z)

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.