Active Task Disambiguation with LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.04485v1
• Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2025 20:20:22 GMT
• Title: Active Task Disambiguation with LLMs
• Authors: Katarzyna Kobalczyk, Nicolas Astorga, Tennison Liu, Mihaela van der Schaar,
• Abstract summary: We introduce a formal definition of task ambiguity and frame the problem of task disambiguation through the lens of Bayesian Experimental Design. Our proposed approach of active task disambiguation enables LLM agents to generate targeted questions maximizing the information gain. Empirical results demonstrate that this form of question selection leads to more effective task disambiguation in comparison to approaches relying on reasoning solely within the space of questions.
• Score: 48.54945212561785
• License:
• Abstract: Despite the impressive performance of large language models (LLMs) across various benchmarks, their ability to address ambiguously specified problems--frequent in real-world interactions--remains underexplored. To address this gap, we introduce a formal definition of task ambiguity and frame the problem of task disambiguation through the lens of Bayesian Experimental Design. By posing clarifying questions, LLM agents can acquire additional task specifications, progressively narrowing the space of viable solutions and reducing the risk of generating unsatisfactory outputs. Yet, generating effective clarifying questions requires LLM agents to engage in a form of meta-cognitive reasoning, an ability LLMs may presently lack. Our proposed approach of active task disambiguation enables LLM agents to generate targeted questions maximizing the information gain. Effectively, this approach shifts the load from implicit to explicit reasoning about the space of viable solutions. Empirical results demonstrate that this form of question selection leads to more effective task disambiguation in comparison to approaches relying on reasoning solely within the space of questions.

Related papers

• Scaling Autonomous Agents via Automatic Reward Modeling And Planning [52.39395405893965]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across a range of tasks. However, they still struggle with problems requiring multi-step decision-making and environmental feedback. We propose a framework that can automatically learn a reward model from the environment without human annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T18:49:25Z)
• An Empirical Exploration of ChatGPT's Ability to Support Problem Formulation Tasks for Mission Engineering and a Documentation of its Performance Variability [0.0]
  This paper explores the quality and consistency of large language models (LLM) in supporting mission engineering problem formulation tasks. We identify a relevant reference problem, a NASA space mission design challenge, and document ChatGPT-3.5's ability to perform stakeholder identification tasks. We find that the LLM performs well in identifying human-focused stakeholders but poorly in recognizing external systems and environmental factors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-05T17:58:23Z)
• A Survey on Uncertainty Quantification of Large Language Models: Taxonomy, Open Research Challenges, and Future Directions [9.045698110081686]
  Large language models (LLMs) generate plausible, factually-incorrect responses, which are expressed with striking confidence. Previous work has shown that hallucinations and other non-factual responses generated by LLMs can be detected by examining the uncertainty of the LLM in its response to the pertinent prompt. This survey seeks to provide an extensive review of existing uncertainty quantification methods for LLMs, identifying their salient features, along with their strengths and weaknesses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-07T06:56:01Z)
• BloomWise: Enhancing Problem-Solving capabilities of Large Language Models using Bloom's-Taxonomy-Inspired Prompts [59.83547898874152]
  We introduce BloomWise, a new prompting technique, inspired by Bloom's taxonomy, to improve the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) The decision regarding the need to employ more sophisticated cognitive skills is based on self-evaluation performed by the LLM. In extensive experiments across 4 popular math reasoning datasets, we have demonstrated the effectiveness of our proposed approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T09:27:52Z)
• DOTS: Learning to Reason Dynamically in LLMs via Optimal Reasoning Trajectories Search [37.16633337724158]
  DOTS is an approach enabling LLMs to reason dynamically via optimal reasoning trajectory search. Our method consistently outperforms static reasoning techniques and the vanilla instruction tuning approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T18:58:09Z)
• Defining Boundaries: A Spectrum of Task Feasibility for Large Language Models [6.008311204104302]
  Large language models (LLMs) have shown remarkable performance in various tasks but often fail to handle queries that exceed their knowledge and capabilities. This paper addresses the need for LLMs to recognize and refuse infeasible tasks due to the required skills surpassing their capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-11T22:58:23Z)
• Q*: Improving Multi-step Reasoning for LLMs with Deliberative Planning [53.6472920229013]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capability in many natural language tasks. LLMs are prone to produce errors, hallucinations and inconsistent statements when performing multi-step reasoning. We introduce Q*, a framework for guiding LLMs decoding process with deliberative planning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T13:08:09Z)
• Clarify When Necessary: Resolving Ambiguity Through Interaction with LMs [58.620269228776294]
  We propose a task-agnostic framework for resolving ambiguity by asking users clarifying questions. We evaluate systems across three NLP applications: question answering, machine translation and natural language inference. We find that intent-sim is robust, demonstrating improvements across a wide range of NLP tasks and LMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T00:18:50Z)
• When does In-context Learning Fall Short and Why? A Study on Specification-Heavy Tasks [54.71034943526973]
  In-context learning (ICL) has become the default method for using large language models (LLMs) We find that ICL falls short of handling specification-heavy tasks, which are tasks with complicated and extensive task specifications. We identify three primary reasons: inability to specifically understand context, misalignment in task schema comprehension with humans, and inadequate long-text understanding ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T14:26:30Z)
• Active Prompting with Chain-of-Thought for Large Language Models [26.5029080638055]
  This paper proposes a new method, Active-Prompt, to adapt large language models to different tasks. By borrowing ideas from the related problem of uncertainty-based active learning, we introduce several metrics to characterize the uncertainty. Experimental results demonstrate the superiority of our proposed method, achieving state-of-the-art on eight complex reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-23T18:58:59Z)

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.