Probing LLM World Models: Enhancing Guesstimation with Wisdom of Crowds Decoding
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.17310v2
- Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2025 07:15:04 GMT
- Title: Probing LLM World Models: Enhancing Guesstimation with Wisdom of Crowds Decoding
- Abstract summary: We introduce a novel guesstimation dataset, MARBLES.<n>This dataset requires one to estimate how many items can fit into containers.<n>We propose WOC decoding'' strategy for LLM guesstimation.
- Score: 42.35821271298182
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Guesstimation, the task of making approximate quantity estimates, is a common real-world challenge. However, it has been largely overlooked in large language models (LLMs) and vision language models (VLMs) research. We introduce a novel guesstimation dataset, MARBLES. This dataset requires one to estimate how many items (e.g., marbles) can fit into containers (e.g., a one-cup measuring cup), both with and without accompanying images. Inspired by the social science concept of the ``Wisdom of Crowds'' (WOC) - taking the median from estimates from a crowd), which has proven effective in guesstimation, we propose ``WOC decoding'' strategy for LLM guesstimation. We show that LLMs/VLMs perform well on guesstimation, suggesting that they possess some level of a "world model" necessary for guesstimation. Moreover, similar to human performance, the WOC decoding method improves LLM/VLM guesstimation accuracy. Furthermore, the inclusion of images in the multimodal condition enhances model performance. These results highlight the value of WOC decoding strategy for LLMs/VLMs and position guesstimation as a probe for evaluating LLMs/VLMs' world model. As LLMs' world model is a fundamental prerequisite for many real-world tasks, e.g., human-AI teaming, our findings have broad implications for the AI community.
Related papers
- SONAR: Task-Aware Code Summary Evaluation for LLM Consumers Without References [15.211628096103473]
Source code summaries have traditionally been evaluated from a human developer's perspective.<n>But this overlooks a growing reality: LLM-based tools and agents increasingly consume code summaries as inputs for software engineering tasks.<n>We propose SONAR, a reference-free framework that evaluates source code summaries along four dimensions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-08-04T19:54:45Z) - Enhancing the Medical Context-Awareness Ability of LLMs via Multifaceted Self-Refinement Learning [49.559151128219725]
Large language models (LLMs) have shown great promise in the medical domain, achieving strong performance on several benchmarks.<n>However, they continue to underperform in real-world medical scenarios, which often demand stronger context-awareness.<n>We propose Multifaceted Self-Refinement (MuSeR), a data-driven approach that enhances LLMs' context-awareness along three key facets.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-11-13T08:13:23Z) - Multi-Agent Evolve: LLM Self-Improve through Co-evolution [53.00458074754831]
Reinforcement Learning (RL) has demonstrated significant potential in enhancing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs)<n>Recent Self-Play RL methods, inspired by the success of the paradigm in games and Go, aim to enhance LLM reasoning capabilities without human-annotated data.<n>We propose Multi-Agent Evolve (MAE), a framework that enables LLMs to self-evolve in solving diverse tasks, including mathematics, reasoning, and general knowledge Q&A.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-10-27T17:58:02Z) - Bayesian Teaching Enables Probabilistic Reasoning in Large Language Models [50.16340812031201]
We show that large language models (LLMs) do not update their beliefs as expected from the Bayesian framework.
We teach the LLMs to reason in a Bayesian manner by training them to mimic the predictions of an optimal Bayesian model.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-03-21T20:13:04Z) - Latent Factor Models Meets Instructions: Goal-conditioned Latent Factor Discovery without Task Supervision [50.45597801390757]
Instruct-LF is a goal-oriented latent factor discovery system.
It integrates instruction-following ability with statistical models to handle noisy datasets.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-02-21T02:03:08Z) - Leveraging Online Olympiad-Level Math Problems for LLMs Training and Contamination-Resistant Evaluation [55.21013307734612]
AoPS-Instruct is a dataset of more than 600,000 high-quality QA pairs.
LiveAoPSBench is an evolving evaluation set with timestamps, derived from the latest forum data.
Our work presents a scalable approach to creating and maintaining large-scale, high-quality datasets for advanced math reasoning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-01-24T06:39:38Z) - FairCoder: Evaluating Social Bias of LLMs in Code Generation [25.358230310973248]
We introduce FairCoder, a novel benchmark for evaluating social bias in code generation.<n>Three metrics are designed to assess fairness performance on this benchmark.<n>The findings reveal that all tested LLMs exhibit social bias.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-01-09T17:42:23Z) - Bayesian Statistical Modeling with Predictors from LLMs [5.5711773076846365]
State of the art large language models (LLMs) have shown impressive performance on a variety of benchmark tasks.
This raises questions about the human-likeness of LLM-derived information.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-13T11:33:30Z) - Sample-Efficient Human Evaluation of Large Language Models via Maximum Discrepancy Competition [38.822535662755314]
We propose a sample-efficient human evaluation method for large language models (LLMs)<n>Our method automatically and adaptively selects a compact set of input instructions that maximize semantic discrepancy between pairs of LLM responses.<n>Human evaluators then perform three-alternative forced choices on these paired responses, which are aggregated into a global ranking using Elo rating.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-10T01:26:24Z) - Evaluating the Factuality of Large Language Models using Large-Scale Knowledge Graphs [30.179703001666173]
Factuality issue is a critical concern for Large Language Models (LLMs)
We propose GraphEval to evaluate an LLM's performance using a substantially large test dataset.
Test dataset is retrieved from a large knowledge graph with more than 10 million facts without expensive human efforts.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-01T06:01:17Z) - Regression-aware Inference with LLMs [52.764328080398805]
We show that an inference strategy can be sub-optimal for common regression and scoring evaluation metrics.
We propose alternate inference strategies that estimate the Bayes-optimal solution for regression and scoring metrics in closed-form from sampled responses.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-07T03:24:34Z) - Can Large Language Models be Trusted for Evaluation? Scalable
Meta-Evaluation of LLMs as Evaluators via Agent Debate [74.06294042304415]
We propose ScaleEval, an agent-debate-assisted meta-evaluation framework.
We release the code for our framework, which is publicly available on GitHub.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-30T07:03:32Z) - Assessing the Reliability of Large Language Model Knowledge [78.38870272050106]
Large language models (LLMs) have been treated as knowledge bases due to their strong performance in knowledge probing tasks.
How do we evaluate the capabilities of LLMs to consistently produce factually correct answers?
We propose MOdel kNowledge relIabiliTy scORe (MONITOR), a novel metric designed to directly measure LLMs' factual reliability.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-15T12:40:30Z) - Evaluating and Explaining Large Language Models for Code Using Syntactic
Structures [74.93762031957883]
This paper introduces ASTxplainer, an explainability method specific to Large Language Models for code.
At its core, ASTxplainer provides an automated method for aligning token predictions with AST nodes.
We perform an empirical evaluation on 12 popular LLMs for code using a curated dataset of the most popular GitHub projects.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-08-07T18:50:57Z) - LVLM-eHub: A Comprehensive Evaluation Benchmark for Large
Vision-Language Models [55.304181390027274]
This paper presents a comprehensive evaluation of publicly available large multimodal models by building a LVLM evaluation Hub (LVLM-eHub)
Our LVLM-eHub consists of $8$ representative LVLMs such as InstructBLIP and MiniGPT-4, which are thoroughly evaluated by a quantitative capability evaluation and an online arena platform.
The study reveals several innovative findings. First, instruction-tuned LVLM with massive in-domain data such as InstructBLIP heavily overfits many existing tasks, generalizing poorly in the open-world scenario.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-15T16:39:24Z) - On Learning to Summarize with Large Language Models as References [101.79795027550959]
Large language models (LLMs) are favored by human annotators over the original reference summaries in commonly used summarization datasets.
We study an LLM-as-reference learning setting for smaller text summarization models to investigate whether their performance can be substantially improved.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-23T16:56:04Z) - Statistical Knowledge Assessment for Large Language Models [79.07989821512128]
Given varying prompts regarding a factoid question, can a large language model (LLM) reliably generate factually correct answers?
We propose KaRR, a statistical approach to assess factual knowledge for LLMs.
Our results reveal that the knowledge in LLMs with the same backbone architecture adheres to the scaling law, while tuning on instruction-following data sometimes compromises the model's capability to generate factually correct text reliably.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-17T18:54:37Z) - LLMMaps -- A Visual Metaphor for Stratified Evaluation of Large Language
Models [13.659853119356507]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing and demonstrated impressive capabilities in various tasks.
They are prone to hallucinations, where the model exposes incorrect or false information in its responses.
We propose LLMMaps as a novel visualization technique that enables users to evaluate LLMs' performance with respect to Q&A datasets.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-02T05:47:09Z)
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.