Dual Traits in Probabilistic Reasoning of Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.11009v1
• Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2024 01:33:45 GMT
• Title: Dual Traits in Probabilistic Reasoning of Large Language Models
• Authors: Shenxiong Li, Huaxia Rui,
• Abstract summary: We investigate how large language models evaluate posterior probabilities.<n>Our results reveal the coexistence of two modes in posterior judgment among state-of-the-art models.<n>We conjecture that the dual modes of judgment may be a result of the contrastive loss function employed in reinforcement learning from human feedback.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: We conducted three experiments to investigate how large language models (LLMs) evaluate posterior probabilities. Our results reveal the coexistence of two modes in posterior judgment among state-of-the-art models: a normative mode, which adheres to Bayes' rule, and a representative-based mode, which relies on similarity -- paralleling human System 1 and System 2 thinking. Additionally, we observed that LLMs struggle to recall base rate information from their memory, and developing prompt engineering strategies to mitigate representative-based judgment may be challenging. We further conjecture that the dual modes of judgment may be a result of the contrastive loss function employed in reinforcement learning from human feedback. Our findings underscore the potential direction for reducing cognitive biases in LLMs and the necessity for cautious deployment of LLMs in critical areas.

Related papers

• Ground What You See: Hallucination-Resistant MLLMs via Caption Feedback, Diversity-Aware Sampling, and Conflict Regularization [38.469173375694076]
  This paper systematically analyzes the root causes of hallucinations in Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs)<n>It identifies three critical factors: (1) an over-reliance on chained visual reasoning, where inaccurate initial descriptions anchor subsequent inferences to incorrect premises; (2) insufficient exploration diversity during policy optimization, leading the model to generate overly confident but erroneous outputs; and (3) destructive conflicts between training samples, where NTK similarity causes false associations and unstable parameter updates.<n> Experimental results demonstrate that our proposed method significantly reduces hallucination rates and effectively enhances the inference accuracy of MLLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-09T07:59:18Z)
• Dual-level Modality Debiasing Learning for Unsupervised Visible-Infrared Person Re-Identification [59.59359638389348]
  We propose a Dual-level Modality Debiasing Learning framework that implements debiasing at both the model and optimization levels.<n>Experiments on benchmark datasets demonstrate that DMDL could enable modality-invariant feature learning and a more generalized model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-03T12:43:16Z)
• LTD-Bench: Evaluating Large Language Models by Letting Them Draw [57.237152905238084]
  LTD-Bench is a breakthrough benchmark for large language models (LLMs)<n>It transforms LLM evaluation from abstract scores to directly observable visual outputs by requiring models to generate drawings through dot matrices or executable code.<n> LTD-Bench's visual outputs enable powerful diagnostic analysis, offering a potential approach to investigate model similarity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-04T08:11:23Z)
• LeWiDi-2025 at NLPerspectives: The Third Edition of the Learning with Disagreements Shared Task [38.500623751317896]
  The LEWIDI series of shared tasks on Learning With Disagreements was established to promote this approach to training and evaluating AI models.<n>The third edition of the task builds on this goal by extending the LEWIDI benchmark to four datasets spanning paraphrase identification, irony detection, sarcasm detection, and natural language inference.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-09T17:04:28Z)
• Learning a Dense Reasoning Reward Model from Expert Demonstration via Inverse Reinforcement Learning [50.20267980386502]
  We learn a dense, token-level reward model for process supervision directly from expert demonstrations.<n>The learned reasoning reward serves two complementary roles: (i) it provides step-level feedback to optimise a reasoning policy during training; and (ii) it functions at inference as a critic to rerank sampled traces under fixed compute budgets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-02T09:55:26Z)
• Defeating Cerberus: Concept-Guided Privacy-Leakage Mitigation in Multimodal Language Models [6.278770177156937]
  We introduce a concept-guided mitigation approach that identifies and modifies the model's internal states associated with PII-related content.<n>Our method guides VLMs to refuse PII-sensitive tasks effectively and efficiently, without requiring re-training or fine-tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-29T21:27:10Z)
• Relative Bias: A Comparative Framework for Quantifying Bias in LLMs [29.112649816695203]
  Relative Bias is a method designed to assess how an LLM's behavior deviates from other LLMs within a specified target domain.<n>We introduce two complementary methodologies: (1) Embedding Transformation analysis, which captures relative bias patterns through sentence representations over the embedding space, and (2) LLM-as-a-Judge, which employs a language model to evaluate outputs comparatively.<n>Applying our framework to several case studies on bias and alignment scenarios following by statistical tests for validation, we find strong alignment between the two scoring methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T01:59:54Z)
• Systematic Bias in Large Language Models: Discrepant Response Patterns in Binary vs. Continuous Judgment Tasks [13.704342633541454]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in tasks such as psychological text analysis and decision-making in automated systems. This study examines how different response format: binary versus continuous, may systematically influence LLMs' judgments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-28T03:20:55Z)
• Embodied-R: Collaborative Framework for Activating Embodied Spatial Reasoning in Foundation Models via Reinforcement Learning [58.86928947970342]
  Embodied-R is a framework combining large-scale Vision-Language Models for perception and small-scale Language Models for reasoning. After training on only 5k embodied video samples, Embodied-R with a 3B LM matches state-of-the-art multimodal reasoning models. Embodied-R also exhibits emergent thinking patterns such as systematic analysis and contextual integration.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-17T06:16:11Z)
• Estimating Commonsense Plausibility through Semantic Shifts [66.06254418551737]
  We propose ComPaSS, a novel discriminative framework that quantifies commonsense plausibility by measuring semantic shifts. Evaluations on two types of fine-grained commonsense plausibility estimation tasks show that ComPaSS consistently outperforms baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-19T06:31:06Z)
• AI-Driven Day-to-Day Route Choice [15.934133434324755]
  "LLMTraveler" is an agent that learns from past experiences and makes decisions by balancing retrieved data and personality traits. This paper systematically evaluates the LLMTraveler's ability to replicate human-like decision-making through two stages of day-to-day congestion games. This capability offers valuable insights for transportation policymaking, such as simulating traveler responses to new policies or changes in the network.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-04T14:13:38Z)
• Behavioral Bias of Vision-Language Models: A Behavioral Finance View [1.7205106391379021]
  We study the potential behavioral biases of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) from a behavioral finance perspective. Our evaluations find that open-source LVLMs such as LLaVA-NeXT, MobileVLM-V2, Mini-Gemini, Mini-Llama3-V 2.5 and Phi-3-vision-128k suffer significantly from these two biases. Our observations highlight directions in which open-source models can improve.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-23T17:54:47Z)
• Making Large Language Models Better Planners with Reasoning-Decision Alignment [70.5381163219608]
  We motivate an end-to-end decision-making model based on multimodality-augmented LLM. We propose a reasoning-decision alignment constraint between the paired CoTs and planning results. We dub our proposed large language planners with reasoning-decision alignment as RDA-Driver.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-25T16:43:47Z)
• Predicting and Understanding Human Action Decisions: Insights from Large Language Models and Cognitive Instance-Based Learning [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated their capabilities across various tasks. This paper exploits the reasoning and generative capabilities of the LLMs to predict human behavior in two sequential decision-making tasks. We compare the performance of LLMs with a cognitive instance-based learning model, which imitates human experiential decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-12T14:13:06Z)
• Learning to Refine with Fine-Grained Natural Language Feedback [81.70313509881315]
  We propose looking at refinement with feedback as a composition of three distinct LLM competencies. A key property of the proposed Detect, Critique, Refine ("DCR") method is that the step 2 critique model can give fine-grained feedback about errors. We show that models of different capabilities benefit from refining with DCR on the task of improving factual consistency of document grounded summaries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T16:15:01Z)
• MR-Ben: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Evaluating System-2 Thinking in LLMs [55.20845457594977]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown increasing capability in problem-solving and decision-making. We present a process-based benchmark MR-Ben that demands a meta-reasoning skill. Our meta-reasoning paradigm is especially suited for system-2 slow thinking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T03:50:23Z)
• Quantifying Emergence in Large Language Models [31.608080868988825]
  We propose a quantifiable solution for estimating emergence of LLMs. Inspired by emergentism in dynamics, we quantify the strength of emergence by comparing the entropy reduction of the macroscopic (semantic) level with that of the microscopic (token) level. Our method demonstrates consistent behaviors across a suite of LMs under both in-context learning (ICL) and natural sentences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-21T09:12:20Z)
• Language as a Latent Sequence: deep latent variable models for semi-supervised paraphrase generation [47.33223015862104]
  We present a novel unsupervised model named variational sequence auto-encoding reconstruction (VSAR), which performs latent sequence inference given an observed text. To leverage information from text pairs, we additionally introduce a novel supervised model we call dual directional learning (DDL), which is designed to integrate with our proposed VSAR model. Our empirical evaluations suggest that the combined model yields competitive performance against the state-of-the-art supervised baselines on complete data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-05T19:35:30Z)
• Counterfactual Maximum Likelihood Estimation for Training Deep Networks [83.44219640437657]
  Deep learning models are prone to learning spurious correlations that should not be learned as predictive clues. We propose a causality-based training framework to reduce the spurious correlations caused by observable confounders. We conduct experiments on two real-world tasks: Natural Language Inference (NLI) and Image Captioning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-07T17:47:16Z)

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.