Towards Geo-Culturally Grounded LLM Generations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.13497v2
• Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 06:38:50 GMT
• Title: Towards Geo-Culturally Grounded LLM Generations
• Authors: Piyawat Lertvittayakumjorn, David Kinney, Vinodkumar Prabhakaran, Donald Martin Jr., Sunipa Dev,
• Abstract summary: Generative large language models (LLMs) have been demonstrated to have gaps in diverse, cultural knowledge across the globe. We investigate the effect of retrieval augmented generation and search-grounding techniques on the ability of LLMs to display familiarity with a diverse range of national cultures.
• Score: 16.9281418974003
• License:
• Abstract: Generative large language models (LLMs) have been demonstrated to have gaps in diverse, cultural knowledge across the globe. We investigate the effect of retrieval augmented generation and search-grounding techniques on the ability of LLMs to display familiarity with a diverse range of national cultures. Specifically, we compare the performance of standard LLMs, LLMs augmented with retrievals from a bespoke knowledge base (i.e., KB grounding), and LLMs augmented with retrievals from a web search (i.e., search grounding) on a series of cultural familiarity benchmarks. We find that search grounding significantly improves the LLM performance on multiple-choice benchmarks that test propositional knowledge (e.g., the norms, artifacts, and institutions of national cultures), while KB grounding's effectiveness is limited by inadequate knowledge base coverage and a suboptimal retriever. However, search grounding also increases the risk of stereotypical judgments by language models, while failing to improve evaluators' judgments of cultural familiarity in a human evaluation with adequate statistical power. These results highlight the distinction between propositional knowledge about a culture and open-ended cultural fluency when it comes to evaluating the cultural familiarity of generative LLMs.

Related papers

• LIBRA: Measuring Bias of Large Language Model from a Local Context [9.612845616659776]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly advanced natural language processing applications. Yet their widespread use raises concerns regarding inherent biases that may reduce utility or harm for particular social groups. This research addresses these limitations with a Local Integrated Bias Recognition and Assessment Framework (LIBRA) for measuring bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-02T04:24:57Z)
• Exploring Knowledge Boundaries in Large Language Models for Retrieval Judgment [56.87031484108484]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly recognized for their practical applications. Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) tackles this challenge and has shown a significant impact on LLMs. By minimizing retrieval requests that yield neutral or harmful results, we can effectively reduce both time and computational costs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-09T15:12:28Z)
• LLM-GLOBE: A Benchmark Evaluating the Cultural Values Embedded in LLM Output [8.435090588116973]
  We propose the LLM-GLOBE benchmark for evaluating the cultural value systems of LLMs. We then leverage the benchmark to compare the values of Chinese and US LLMs. Our methodology includes a novel "LLMs-as-a-Jury" pipeline which automates the evaluation of open-ended content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-09T01:38:55Z)
• Hate Personified: Investigating the role of LLMs in content moderation [64.26243779985393]
  For subjective tasks such as hate detection, where people perceive hate differently, the Large Language Model's (LLM) ability to represent diverse groups is unclear. By including additional context in prompts, we analyze LLM's sensitivity to geographical priming, persona attributes, and numerical information to assess how well the needs of various groups are reflected.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T16:43:17Z)
• Methodology of Adapting Large English Language Models for Specific Cultural Contexts [10.151487049108626]
  We propose a rapid adaptation method for large models in specific cultural contexts. The adapted LLM significantly enhances its capabilities in domain-specific knowledge and adaptability to safety values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-26T09:16:08Z)
• Understanding the Capabilities and Limitations of Large Language Models for Cultural Commonsense [98.09670425244462]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated substantial commonsense understanding. This paper examines the capabilities and limitations of several state-of-the-art LLMs in the context of cultural commonsense tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-07T20:28:34Z)
• CulturalTeaming: AI-Assisted Interactive Red-Teaming for Challenging LLMs' (Lack of) Multicultural Knowledge [69.82940934994333]
  We introduce CulturalTeaming, an interactive red-teaming system that leverages human-AI collaboration to build challenging evaluation dataset. Our study reveals that CulturalTeaming's various modes of AI assistance support annotators in creating cultural questions. CULTURALBENCH-V0.1 is a compact yet high-quality evaluation dataset with users' red-teaming attempts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-10T00:25:09Z)
• FAC$^2$E: Better Understanding Large Language Model Capabilities by Dissociating Language and Cognition [56.76951887823882]
  Large language models (LLMs) are primarily evaluated by overall performance on various text understanding and generation tasks. We present FAC$2$E, a framework for Fine-grAined and Cognition-grounded LLMs' Capability Evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-29T21:05:37Z)
• Investigating the Factual Knowledge Boundary of Large Language Models with Retrieval Augmentation [109.8527403904657]
  We show that large language models (LLMs) possess unwavering confidence in their knowledge and cannot handle the conflict between internal and external knowledge well. Retrieval augmentation proves to be an effective approach in enhancing LLMs' awareness of knowledge boundaries. We propose a simple method to dynamically utilize supporting documents with our judgement strategy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T16:46:10Z)

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.