Sui Generis: Large Language Models for Authorship Attribution and Verification in Latin
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.09245v1
- Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 20:41:49 GMT
- Title: Sui Generis: Large Language Models for Authorship Attribution and Verification in Latin
- Authors: Gleb Schmidt, Svetlana Gorovaia, Ivan P. Yamshchikov,
- Abstract summary: The study showcases that LLMs can be robust in zero-shot authorship verification even on short texts.
The experiments also demonstrate that steering the model's authorship analysis and decision-making is challenging.
- Score: 6.704529554100875
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: This paper evaluates the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) in authorship attribution and authorship verification tasks for Latin texts of the Patristic Era. The study showcases that LLMs can be robust in zero-shot authorship verification even on short texts without sophisticated feature engineering. Yet, the models can also be easily "mislead" by semantics. The experiments also demonstrate that steering the model's authorship analysis and decision-making is challenging, unlike what is reported in the studies dealing with high-resource modern languages. Although LLMs prove to be able to beat, under certain circumstances, the traditional baselines, obtaining a nuanced and truly explainable decision requires at best a lot of experimentation.
Related papers
- A Bayesian Approach to Harnessing the Power of LLMs in Authorship Attribution [57.309390098903]
Authorship attribution aims to identify the origin or author of a document.
Large Language Models (LLMs) with their deep reasoning capabilities and ability to maintain long-range textual associations offer a promising alternative.
Our results on the IMDb and blog datasets show an impressive 85% accuracy in one-shot authorship classification across ten authors.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-29T04:14:23Z) - MT-PATCHER: Selective and Extendable Knowledge Distillation from Large Language Models for Machine Translation [61.65537912700187]
Large Language Models (LLM) have demonstrated their strong ability in the field of machine translation (MT)
We propose a framework called MT-Patcher, which transfers knowledge from LLMs to existing MT models in a selective, comprehensive and proactive manner.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-14T16:07:39Z) - Can Large Language Models Identify Authorship? [16.35265384114857]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated an exceptional capacity for reasoning and problem-solving.
This work seeks to address three research questions: (1) Can LLMs perform zero-shot, end-to-end authorship verification effectively?
(2) Are LLMs capable of accurately attributing authorship among multiple candidates authors (e.g., 10 and 20)?
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-13T03:22:02Z) - Best Practices for Text Annotation with Large Language Models [11.421942894219901]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have ushered in a new era of text annotation.
This paper proposes a comprehensive set of standards and best practices for their reliable, reproducible, and ethical use.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-05T15:43:50Z) - Learning Shortcuts: On the Misleading Promise of NLU in Language Models [4.8951183832371]
Large language models (LLMs) have enabled significant performance gains in the field of natural language processing.
Recent studies have found that LLMs often resort to shortcuts when performing tasks, creating an illusion of enhanced performance while lacking generalizability in their decision rules.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-17T21:55:15Z) - CLOMO: Counterfactual Logical Modification with Large Language Models [109.60793869938534]
We introduce a novel task, Counterfactual Logical Modification (CLOMO), and a high-quality human-annotated benchmark.
In this task, LLMs must adeptly alter a given argumentative text to uphold a predetermined logical relationship.
We propose an innovative evaluation metric, the Self-Evaluation Score (SES), to directly evaluate the natural language output of LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-29T08:29:54Z) - Are Large Language Models Good Fact Checkers: A Preliminary Study [26.023148371263012]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have drawn significant attention due to their outstanding reasoning capabilities and extensive knowledge repository.
This study aims to comprehensively evaluate various LLMs in tackling specific fact-checking subtasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-29T05:04:52Z) - Are Large Language Models Really Robust to Word-Level Perturbations? [68.60618778027694]
We propose a novel rational evaluation approach that leverages pre-trained reward models as diagnostic tools.
Longer conversations manifest the comprehensive grasp of language models in terms of their proficiency in understanding questions.
Our results demonstrate that LLMs frequently exhibit vulnerability to word-level perturbations that are commonplace in daily language usage.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-20T09:23:46Z) - Large Language Models Are Not Strong Abstract Reasoners [12.354660792999269]
Large Language Models have shown tremendous performance on a variety of natural language processing tasks.
It is unclear whether LLMs can achieve human-like cognitive capabilities or whether these models are still fundamentally circumscribed.
We introduce a new benchmark for evaluating language models beyond memorization on abstract reasoning tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-31T04:50:29Z) - Sentiment Analysis in the Era of Large Language Models: A Reality Check [69.97942065617664]
This paper investigates the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in performing various sentiment analysis tasks.
We evaluate performance across 13 tasks on 26 datasets and compare the results against small language models (SLMs) trained on domain-specific datasets.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-24T10:45:25Z) - Shortcut Learning of Large Language Models in Natural Language
Understanding [119.45683008451698]
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved state-of-the-art performance on a series of natural language understanding tasks.
They might rely on dataset bias and artifacts as shortcuts for prediction.
This has significantly affected their generalizability and adversarial robustness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-08-25T03:51:39Z)
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.