Logical Consistency of Large Language Models in Fact-checking

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.16100v1
• Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 17:42:25 GMT
• Title: Logical Consistency of Large Language Models in Fact-checking
• Authors: Bishwamittra Ghosh, Sarah Hasan, Naheed Anjum Arafat, Arijit Khan,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant success in performing varied natural language tasks. Despite their impressive ability to generate human-like texts, LLMs are infamous for their inconsistent responses.
• Score: 6.286017217366497
• License:
• Abstract: In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant success in performing varied natural language tasks such as language translation, question-answering, summarizing, fact-checking, etc. Despite LLMs' impressive ability to generate human-like texts, LLMs are infamous for their inconsistent responses -- a meaning-preserving change in the input query results in an inconsistent response and attributes to vulnerabilities of LLMs such as hallucination, jailbreaking, etc. Consequently, existing research focuses on simple paraphrasing-based consistency assessment of LLMs, and ignores complex queries that necessitates an even better understanding of logical reasoning by an LLM. Our work therefore addresses the logical inconsistency of LLMs under complex logical queries with primitive logical operators, e.g., negation, conjunction, and disjunction. As a test bed, we consider retrieval-augmented LLMs on a fact-checking task involving propositional logic queries from real-world knowledge graphs (KGs). Our contributions are three-fold. Benchmark: We introduce three logical fact-checking datasets over KGs for community development towards logically consistent LLMs. Assessment: We propose consistency measures of LLMs on propositional logic queries as input and demonstrate that existing LLMs lack logical consistency, specially on complex queries. Improvement: We employ supervised fine-tuning to improve the logical consistency of LLMs on the complex fact-checking task with KG contexts.

Related papers

• RuAG: Learned-rule-augmented Generation for Large Language Models [62.64389390179651]
  We propose a novel framework, RuAG, to automatically distill large volumes of offline data into interpretable first-order logic rules. We evaluate our framework on public and private industrial tasks, including natural language processing, time-series, decision-making, and industrial tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-04T00:01:34Z)
• LOGIC-LM++: Multi-Step Refinement for Symbolic Formulations [1.024113475677323]
  This paper proposes Logic-LM++, an improvement on Logic-LM. It uses the ability of LLMs to do pairwise comparisons, allowing the evaluation of the refinements suggested by the LLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-22T12:50:41Z)
• LogicBench: Towards Systematic Evaluation of Logical Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models [52.03659714625452]
  Recently developed large language models (LLMs) have been shown to perform remarkably well on a wide range of language understanding tasks. But, can they really "reason" over the natural language? This question has been receiving significant research attention and many reasoning skills such as commonsense, numerical, and qualitative have been studied.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-23T21:08:49Z)
• Can Language Models Pretend Solvers? Logic Code Simulation with LLMs [3.802945676202634]
  Transformer-based large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant potential in addressing logic problems. This study delves into a novel aspect, namely logic code simulation, which forces LLMs to emulate logical solvers in predicting the results of logical programs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-24T11:27:16Z)
• Do Large Language Models Understand Logic or Just Mimick Context? [14.081178100662163]
  This paper investigates the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) on two logical reasoning datasets. It is found that LLMs do not truly understand logical rules; rather, in-context learning has simply enhanced the likelihood of these models arriving at the correct answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T12:12:35Z)
• LogicAsker: Evaluating and Improving the Logical Reasoning Ability of Large Language Models [63.14196038655506]
  We introduce LogicAsker, a novel approach for evaluating and enhancing the logical reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) Our methodology reveals significant gaps in LLMs' learning of logical rules, with identified reasoning failures ranging from 29% to 90% across different models. We leverage these findings to construct targeted demonstration examples and fine-tune data, notably enhancing logical reasoning in models like GPT-4o by up to 5%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-01T13:53:53Z)
• 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)
• Improving Large Language Models in Event Relation Logical Prediction [33.88499005859982]
  Event relation extraction is a challenging task that demands thorough semantic understanding and rigorous logical reasoning. In this paper, we conduct an in-depth investigation to systematically explore the capability of LLMs in understanding and applying event relation logic. Our study reveals that LLMs are not logically consistent reasoners, which results in their suboptimal performance on tasks that need rigorous reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-13T14:53:06Z)
• Exploring Self-supervised Logic-enhanced Training for Large Language Models [59.227222647741094]
  In this paper, we make the first attempt to investigate the feasibility of incorporating logical knowledge through self-supervised post-training. We devise an auto-regressive objective variant of MERIt and integrate it with two LLM series, i.e., FLAN-T5 and LLaMA, with parameter size ranging from 3 billion to 13 billion. The results on two challenging logical reasoning benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of LogicLLM.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T06:13:10Z)
• Logic-LM: Empowering Large Language Models with Symbolic Solvers for Faithful Logical Reasoning [101.26814728062065]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown human-like reasoning abilities but still struggle with complex logical problems. This paper introduces a novel framework, Logic-LM, which integrates LLMs with symbolic solvers to improve logical problem-solving.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-20T22:25:38Z)

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.