Metacognitive Monitoring: A Human Ability Beyond Generative Artificial Intelligence
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.13392v1
- Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 09:42:30 GMT
- Title: Metacognitive Monitoring: A Human Ability Beyond Generative Artificial Intelligence
- Authors: Markus Huff, Elanur Ulakçı,
- Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive alignment with human cognitive processes.
This study investigates whether ChatGPT possess metacognitive monitoring abilities akin to humans.
- Score: 0.0
- License:
- Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive alignment with human cognitive processes, raising questions about the extent of their similarity to human cognition. This study investigates whether LLMs, specifically ChatGPT, possess metacognitive monitoring abilities akin to humans-particularly in predicting memory performance on an item-by-item basis. We employed a cross-agent prediction model to compare the metacognitive performance of humans and ChatGPT in a language-based memory task involving garden-path sentences preceded by either fitting or unfitting context sentences. Both humans and ChatGPT rated the memorability of these sentences; humans then completed a surprise recognition memory test. Our findings reveal a significant positive relationship between humans' memorability ratings and their actual recognition performance, indicating reliable metacognitive monitoring. In contrast, ChatGPT did not exhibit a similar predictive capability. Bootstrapping analyses demonstrated that none of the GPT models tested (GPT-3.5-turbo, GPT-4-turbo, GPT-4o) could accurately predict human memory performance on a per-item basis. This suggests that, despite their advanced language processing abilities and alignment with human cognition at the object level, current LLMs lack the metacognitive mechanisms that enable humans to anticipate their memory performance. These results highlight a fundamental difference between human and AI cognition at the metacognitive level. Addressing this gap is crucial for developing AI systems capable of effective self-monitoring and adaptation to human needs, thereby enhancing human-AI interactions across domains such as education and personalized learning.
Related papers
- 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) - The Strong Pull of Prior Knowledge in Large Language Models and Its Impact on Emotion Recognition [74.04775677110179]
In-context Learning (ICL) has emerged as a powerful paradigm for performing natural language tasks with Large Language Models (LLM)
We show that LLMs have strong yet inconsistent priors in emotion recognition that ossify their predictions.
Our results suggest that caution is needed when using ICL with larger LLMs for affect-centered tasks outside their pre-training domain.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-25T19:07:32Z) - LLMvsSmall Model? Large Language Model Based Text Augmentation Enhanced
Personality Detection Model [58.887561071010985]
Personality detection aims to detect one's personality traits underlying in social media posts.
Most existing methods learn post features directly by fine-tuning the pre-trained language models.
We propose a large language model (LLM) based text augmentation enhanced personality detection model.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-12T12:10:18Z) - Tuning-Free Accountable Intervention for LLM Deployment -- A
Metacognitive Approach [55.613461060997004]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have catalyzed transformative advances across a spectrum of natural language processing tasks.
We propose an innovative textitmetacognitive approach, dubbed textbfCLEAR, to equip LLMs with capabilities for self-aware error identification and correction.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-08T19:18:53Z) - Towards a Psychology of Machines: Large Language Models Predict Human Memory [0.0]
Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable abilities in natural language processing.
This study explores whether LLMs can predict human memory performance in tasks involving garden-path sentences and contextual information.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-08T08:41:14Z) - Psychometric Predictive Power of Large Language Models [32.31556074470733]
We find that instruction tuning does not always make large language models human-like from a cognitive modeling perspective.
Next-word probabilities estimated by instruction-tuned LLMs are often worse at simulating human reading behavior than those estimated by base LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-13T17:19:14Z) - Democratizing Reasoning Ability: Tailored Learning from Large Language
Model [97.4921006089966]
We propose a tailored learning approach to distill such reasoning ability to smaller LMs.
We exploit the potential of LLM as a reasoning teacher by building an interactive multi-round learning paradigm.
To exploit the reasoning potential of the smaller LM, we propose self-reflection learning to motivate the student to learn from self-made mistakes.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-20T07:50:10Z) - Violation of Expectation via Metacognitive Prompting Reduces Theory of
Mind Prediction Error in Large Language Models [0.0]
Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit a compelling level of proficiency in Theory of Mind (ToM) tasks.
This ability to impute unobservable mental states to others is vital to human social cognition and may prove equally important in principal-agent relations between humans and Artificial Intelligences (AIs)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-10T20:05:13Z) - Human-Like Intuitive Behavior and Reasoning Biases Emerged in Language
Models -- and Disappeared in GPT-4 [0.0]
We show that large language models (LLMs) exhibit behavior that resembles human-like intuition.
We also probe how sturdy the inclination for intuitive-like decision-making is.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-13T08:43:13Z) - Revisiting the Reliability of Psychological Scales on Large Language Models [62.57981196992073]
This study aims to determine the reliability of applying personality assessments to Large Language Models.
Analysis of 2,500 settings per model, including GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Gemini-Pro, and LLaMA-3.1, reveals that various LLMs show consistency in responses to the Big Five Inventory.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-31T15:03:28Z) - Thinking Fast and Slow in Large Language Models [0.08057006406834465]
Large language models (LLMs) are currently at the forefront of intertwining AI systems with human communication and everyday life.
In this study, we show that LLMs like GPT-3 exhibit behavior that resembles human-like intuition - and the cognitive errors that come with it.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-12-10T05:07:30Z)
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.